Discussion: Proposed Action Plan/ Orienteering USA Starts and Membership
in: Orienteering; General
May 10, 2011 8:54 PM
#
All,
The following email was posted to Boardnet and Clubnet at 4:41 pm Tuesday. Knowing the importance of the Attackpoint community, plus to fulfill a promise, we are including the AP crowd in the dialogue as well.
A MEMBER OF THE BOARDNET/ CLUBNET COMMUNITY WILL POST THE DOCUMENT...HERE IS THE COVER LETTER.
"To the Board, Key Volunteers and those who lurk,
As a result of our April 16th board meeting, a work group was assembled to form an action plan to generate starts and memership. Key to our strategic plan, these measures are critical to the health and future of the organization.
Attached you will see a proposed action plan for discussion, debate and improvement. I ask that all who receive this memo (including Attackpoint) provide your input by the Sunday, the 15th. A final plan will be issued later that week.
While this plan has always been in the works, funding was an issue. However a donor whom wishes to remain anonymous generously donated $15,000 to move this program forward. This individual believes in our sport and what it can be. Now all we need is discussion, direction and volunteer labor to move it forward. I hope that all are copied on this memo (including those on Attackpoint) will consider doing their part.
Moving forward, if you have any specific questions please contact me, but please direct any conversation to the net. (Including this thread).
Finally, in a few minutes, I will be posting a similar thread to Attackpoint. If one person who receives this can post this document, I would apprecaite it."
Sincerely
Glen"
EDITORS NOTE: I am traveling Wednesday - Sunday promoting orienteering to 6,000 teens and 13,000 adults. I will have very limited Internet access. If I don't answer a post it is because I have not seen it. I will try to reply once a night.
The following email was posted to Boardnet and Clubnet at 4:41 pm Tuesday. Knowing the importance of the Attackpoint community, plus to fulfill a promise, we are including the AP crowd in the dialogue as well.
A MEMBER OF THE BOARDNET/ CLUBNET COMMUNITY WILL POST THE DOCUMENT...HERE IS THE COVER LETTER.
"To the Board, Key Volunteers and those who lurk,
As a result of our April 16th board meeting, a work group was assembled to form an action plan to generate starts and memership. Key to our strategic plan, these measures are critical to the health and future of the organization.
Attached you will see a proposed action plan for discussion, debate and improvement. I ask that all who receive this memo (including Attackpoint) provide your input by the Sunday, the 15th. A final plan will be issued later that week.
While this plan has always been in the works, funding was an issue. However a donor whom wishes to remain anonymous generously donated $15,000 to move this program forward. This individual believes in our sport and what it can be. Now all we need is discussion, direction and volunteer labor to move it forward. I hope that all are copied on this memo (including those on Attackpoint) will consider doing their part.
Moving forward, if you have any specific questions please contact me, but please direct any conversation to the net. (Including this thread).
Finally, in a few minutes, I will be posting a similar thread to Attackpoint. If one person who receives this can post this document, I would apprecaite it."
Sincerely
Glen"
EDITORS NOTE: I am traveling Wednesday - Sunday promoting orienteering to 6,000 teens and 13,000 adults. I will have very limited Internet access. If I don't answer a post it is because I have not seen it. I will try to reply once a night.
May 10, 2011 9:46 PM
#
First uninformed comments:
1) I like the P-PIP ideas.
2) The total expenditures on enhancing services to clubs is very high, I'm not sure how compelling those offerings are, and they seem more like shovel-ready projects (i.e., places you know you can spend money) than things that will contribute directly to the prime directives (viz., increasing starts.) But, I'm eager to have my understanding enhanced.
1) I like the P-PIP ideas.
2) The total expenditures on enhancing services to clubs is very high, I'm not sure how compelling those offerings are, and they seem more like shovel-ready projects (i.e., places you know you can spend money) than things that will contribute directly to the prime directives (viz., increasing starts.) But, I'm eager to have my understanding enhanced.
May 10, 2011 10:02 PM
#
Uninformed question: Does anyone join OUSA who is *not* a club member?
May 11, 2011 12:23 AM
#
@Neil--yes, there are a few 'at large' members. Sometimes this is because there is no active club in their area but they want to be part of OUSA. I don't have numbers; most OUSA members do claim club membership too.
May 11, 2011 11:48 AM
#
Good morning:
1) PG - thanks for the post
2) J-man. #2 are shovel ready but they are things that we should have been doing for years but didn't. They can help enhance the sport, the OUSA brand (whose materials are tied closely to the sport) and as planned generate some membership activity.
3) ndobbs. There are at large members but they are few and far between. Basically people (1) show up at an event (2) join the local club if they like what they saw/ experienced and then (3) join OUSA.
Have a good day all. Heading on the road.
Glen
1) PG - thanks for the post
2) J-man. #2 are shovel ready but they are things that we should have been doing for years but didn't. They can help enhance the sport, the OUSA brand (whose materials are tied closely to the sport) and as planned generate some membership activity.
3) ndobbs. There are at large members but they are few and far between. Basically people (1) show up at an event (2) join the local club if they like what they saw/ experienced and then (3) join OUSA.
Have a good day all. Heading on the road.
Glen
May 11, 2011 2:38 PM
#
There were 186 at large members out of a total of 1991 on the list I received in March, 2011. Not sure if almost 10% is really "few and far between". Of the 186, 90 were schoolkids, so maybe you would really consider only 96 to be bona fide at large members.
May 11, 2011 8:08 PM
#
I'll be completely off the grid for the next 4 days (bliss!), so this is all I'll be able to add before the 15th. Hopefully this will be constructive, given my short time to look at it.
General comments:
Good, nice to see a more concrete plan. I wish it was even more specific about tasks that need to be done and what precisely the money will be spent on. In some cases the bullets are very esoteric here. That was fine for the strategic plan, but its time to get down to nuts and bolts.
Specifics (starting at the top and working down, in order):
1)
there are 3 membership/starts goals stated for 2011. The start numbers are clear, but is the memberships number the number of *new* memberships we want to add (above the existing 1991), or is that supposed to be the total number of OUSA memberships at the end of the year? One would require doubling membership while the other is just a few hundred more (10%). My guess is its the former (doubling). Probably should make this clear in the doc.
2)
In the A-meet starts section, first two items are great. The third section (Build A-meet platform now for strong 2012 and 2013), the tasks are pretty vague. "Work with clubs to create national calendar". Not sure exactly what that means. I gather this whole section means OUSA is going to actively recruit clubs and NGOs to put on A-meets. Is that correct? If so, make the wording clear. Just say someone is going to contact clubs and talk them into holding meets. Along those lines, what is the $2500 for here exactly. It says its for "incentives", which sounds shady. Is it something like "we'll give you $500 cash if you put on a meet in the SW region in May" ? That's what it sounds like. Is that the intent?
3)
a]
In the local meets section, under "Race Director Program/ Phase I" - this is too obscure for me. What exactly is this? Is this financial payments to NGO's for marketing of OUSA events they are hosting? Whats the "...$500 to be paid within 14 days..." thing about? Paid for what? It mentions establishing a program with recognized entities. I see the entities, but what is the program?
b]
In the local meets section, under "Public Relations and Blog Program." Again, what is this exactly? It sounds like we intend to have someone go onto blogs of other groups (running, AR, etc?) and "talk up" orienteering. As in "hey guys, give orienteering a try." Are we paying someone $3k to do this? Otherwise what is the money for? And how is this different from the "Utilize Online Advertising" block at the top of the Local Meets section that is already spending $3k online? Just looking for the distinction and the specifics. The bullets here are too esoteric.
c]
Club starts competition is an interesting idea. Not sure if the incentive and tiers are the best though. My first thought when reading this was "ok, just send the $500 to DVOA now and be done with it for the top tier." Maybe do it by percentage of last years starts instead? Its difficult to imagine that $500 will be enough to push any club to work hard on this. A club could host a single A-meet and clear 5 times that, without any effort being put towards increasing starts. Increasing starts is really hard. No one is really sure how to do it, but clubs do know how to host A-meets. Prestige is probably more valuable than cash in this case - like a trophy. I dunno, I just think the small prize money spent here isn't going to do much to inspire clubs. I like the contest idea though.
4)
a]
Under "Membership". The very first bullet states "More starts will lead to more members." I can only say this: Pure speculation. :) You might instead say more members will lead to more starts, and I'd probably buy that. If the majority of our increased starts are from boy scouts we're likely to get zero new members. Just take this bullet out - the numbers will tell us if its true or not at the end of the year (assuming we actually do have more starts :)
b]
I don't like the idea of getting phone calls from people reminding me to renew. I don't like the hard-sell in general - it puts me off. Fortunately OUSA doesn't have my phone number (and I renew when the postcard arrives anyway), so I'm not too worried about this. But it sounds like a large amount of frustrating work for the people listed here. I think the burden is underestimated. I have no idea about whether it might help gain back lapsed memberships or not (over what we are already doing with the postcard). Maybe just sending a postcard/email a year later to people who had dropped off instead (i.e. keep a lapsed list)? This is what my club usually does. "We noticed you didn't renew. Here's the latest newsletter. Please come back"
b]
"Cross Membership Recruitment with Clubs" - having clubs push OUSA membership is good, but going the other way is probably wasted effort. As mentioned above in this thread, most (90-95%) OUSA members are already club members, and those that aren't are either in geographic locations without clubs, or are from groups that joined (scouts). I wouldn't spend money on this, unless you are proposing we go to a federation membership system like Canada uses (worth considering).
c]
"Increase Presence and Value of OUSA to Members via Clubs" Second bullet says "OUSA / club/ event collateral materials and kits membership forms ($2,000)" This is vague. What exactly is "event collateral?" Is it just printing copies of the OUSA membership form? My guess is clubs would be willing to just make a few copies themselves if encouraged. Can we have some specifics on what this $2k is buying?
"Electronic Issue of ONA ($1,000)" - I assume this means giving out free e-copies of ONA as promotions? If so, why does it cost OUSA $1000? We've already paid for OUSA, it has its own budget line. Passing out e-copies to encourage membership shouldn't cost us additional. So maybe its something else? Please expand.
"Updated ONA design ($2,500)" - Definitely need to expand on this. What does this mean? In the 2011 budget we reduced funding to ONA in exchange for some e-issues in order to save cash. This looks like a $2500 addition to the ONA budget for some retooling. I'm kindof confused.
"Online event registration ($3,000)" Is this for purchase of Kent Shaw's software? By OUSA for clubs? Or is this to buy something new? Please elaborate, what are we intending to buy for $3k here?
d]
"Cross Membership Drive" First bullet under this is a duplication of same line in "Cross Membership Recruitment with Clubs." Why are there two separate "Cross Membership" sections? Suggest combine into one. I like the rebate idea. How will this be implemented? That is, how do I collect on a referral? OUSA memberships should be worth more than $2 to the federation. Make it $4. Paying $4 to get the $35 is still above gross expenses, and you've potentially hooked someone for life. Clubs could even subsidize to make the sale - Sell the OUSA membership combined with their club membership at a discount (say $33), pass on $35 to OUSA and pocket the other $2. Fold this into the next section ("Explore new OUSA Club Membership Income Arrangement"), offering discounted federation membership with any club membership. Closer to the CAN model.
General comments:
Good, nice to see a more concrete plan. I wish it was even more specific about tasks that need to be done and what precisely the money will be spent on. In some cases the bullets are very esoteric here. That was fine for the strategic plan, but its time to get down to nuts and bolts.
Specifics (starting at the top and working down, in order):
1)
there are 3 membership/starts goals stated for 2011. The start numbers are clear, but is the memberships number the number of *new* memberships we want to add (above the existing 1991), or is that supposed to be the total number of OUSA memberships at the end of the year? One would require doubling membership while the other is just a few hundred more (10%). My guess is its the former (doubling). Probably should make this clear in the doc.
2)
In the A-meet starts section, first two items are great. The third section (Build A-meet platform now for strong 2012 and 2013), the tasks are pretty vague. "Work with clubs to create national calendar". Not sure exactly what that means. I gather this whole section means OUSA is going to actively recruit clubs and NGOs to put on A-meets. Is that correct? If so, make the wording clear. Just say someone is going to contact clubs and talk them into holding meets. Along those lines, what is the $2500 for here exactly. It says its for "incentives", which sounds shady. Is it something like "we'll give you $500 cash if you put on a meet in the SW region in May" ? That's what it sounds like. Is that the intent?
3)
a]
In the local meets section, under "Race Director Program/ Phase I" - this is too obscure for me. What exactly is this? Is this financial payments to NGO's for marketing of OUSA events they are hosting? Whats the "...$500 to be paid within 14 days..." thing about? Paid for what? It mentions establishing a program with recognized entities. I see the entities, but what is the program?
b]
In the local meets section, under "Public Relations and Blog Program." Again, what is this exactly? It sounds like we intend to have someone go onto blogs of other groups (running, AR, etc?) and "talk up" orienteering. As in "hey guys, give orienteering a try." Are we paying someone $3k to do this? Otherwise what is the money for? And how is this different from the "Utilize Online Advertising" block at the top of the Local Meets section that is already spending $3k online? Just looking for the distinction and the specifics. The bullets here are too esoteric.
c]
Club starts competition is an interesting idea. Not sure if the incentive and tiers are the best though. My first thought when reading this was "ok, just send the $500 to DVOA now and be done with it for the top tier." Maybe do it by percentage of last years starts instead? Its difficult to imagine that $500 will be enough to push any club to work hard on this. A club could host a single A-meet and clear 5 times that, without any effort being put towards increasing starts. Increasing starts is really hard. No one is really sure how to do it, but clubs do know how to host A-meets. Prestige is probably more valuable than cash in this case - like a trophy. I dunno, I just think the small prize money spent here isn't going to do much to inspire clubs. I like the contest idea though.
4)
a]
Under "Membership". The very first bullet states "More starts will lead to more members." I can only say this: Pure speculation. :) You might instead say more members will lead to more starts, and I'd probably buy that. If the majority of our increased starts are from boy scouts we're likely to get zero new members. Just take this bullet out - the numbers will tell us if its true or not at the end of the year (assuming we actually do have more starts :)
b]
I don't like the idea of getting phone calls from people reminding me to renew. I don't like the hard-sell in general - it puts me off. Fortunately OUSA doesn't have my phone number (and I renew when the postcard arrives anyway), so I'm not too worried about this. But it sounds like a large amount of frustrating work for the people listed here. I think the burden is underestimated. I have no idea about whether it might help gain back lapsed memberships or not (over what we are already doing with the postcard). Maybe just sending a postcard/email a year later to people who had dropped off instead (i.e. keep a lapsed list)? This is what my club usually does. "We noticed you didn't renew. Here's the latest newsletter. Please come back"
b]
"Cross Membership Recruitment with Clubs" - having clubs push OUSA membership is good, but going the other way is probably wasted effort. As mentioned above in this thread, most (90-95%) OUSA members are already club members, and those that aren't are either in geographic locations without clubs, or are from groups that joined (scouts). I wouldn't spend money on this, unless you are proposing we go to a federation membership system like Canada uses (worth considering).
c]
"Increase Presence and Value of OUSA to Members via Clubs" Second bullet says "OUSA / club/ event collateral materials and kits membership forms ($2,000)" This is vague. What exactly is "event collateral?" Is it just printing copies of the OUSA membership form? My guess is clubs would be willing to just make a few copies themselves if encouraged. Can we have some specifics on what this $2k is buying?
"Electronic Issue of ONA ($1,000)" - I assume this means giving out free e-copies of ONA as promotions? If so, why does it cost OUSA $1000? We've already paid for OUSA, it has its own budget line. Passing out e-copies to encourage membership shouldn't cost us additional. So maybe its something else? Please expand.
"Updated ONA design ($2,500)" - Definitely need to expand on this. What does this mean? In the 2011 budget we reduced funding to ONA in exchange for some e-issues in order to save cash. This looks like a $2500 addition to the ONA budget for some retooling. I'm kindof confused.
"Online event registration ($3,000)" Is this for purchase of Kent Shaw's software? By OUSA for clubs? Or is this to buy something new? Please elaborate, what are we intending to buy for $3k here?
d]
"Cross Membership Drive" First bullet under this is a duplication of same line in "Cross Membership Recruitment with Clubs." Why are there two separate "Cross Membership" sections? Suggest combine into one. I like the rebate idea. How will this be implemented? That is, how do I collect on a referral? OUSA memberships should be worth more than $2 to the federation. Make it $4. Paying $4 to get the $35 is still above gross expenses, and you've potentially hooked someone for life. Clubs could even subsidize to make the sale - Sell the OUSA membership combined with their club membership at a discount (say $33), pass on $35 to OUSA and pocket the other $2. Fold this into the next section ("Explore new OUSA Club Membership Income Arrangement"), offering discounted federation membership with any club membership. Closer to the CAN model.
May 11, 2011 8:17 PM
#
Whats the "...$500 to be paid withing 14 days..." thing about? Paid for what?
This item was put in by request of Get Lost!! and Peak Assurance. As of now, an NCO (non-club operator; thanks Eddie for proposing the term, we dislike "third party") owes $500 to Orienteering USA as collateral for sanctioning, due with the application. It's not a surcharge, just a deposit. If we have 100 starts at $9 non-member, the current agreement says we pay $500 upfront and $400 after the event.
There is a good reason for the deposit; it's a lever. If a club doesn't pay sanctioning fees, it doesn't get rechartered. But there is no similar stick for an NCO. This mechanism puts NCOs on unequal standing with the clubs, which is perhaps the correct intent. In order to entice NCOs into holding sanctioned events within the close timeframe, and consisent with the goal of increasing starts, the proposal is to temporarily postpone the fee until say 30 days prior to the event (it currently becomes due for the clubs 14 days after the event). This proposal is revenue-neutral if everyone upholds their end of the deal.
This item was put in by request of Get Lost!! and Peak Assurance. As of now, an NCO (non-club operator; thanks Eddie for proposing the term, we dislike "third party") owes $500 to Orienteering USA as collateral for sanctioning, due with the application. It's not a surcharge, just a deposit. If we have 100 starts at $9 non-member, the current agreement says we pay $500 upfront and $400 after the event.
There is a good reason for the deposit; it's a lever. If a club doesn't pay sanctioning fees, it doesn't get rechartered. But there is no similar stick for an NCO. This mechanism puts NCOs on unequal standing with the clubs, which is perhaps the correct intent. In order to entice NCOs into holding sanctioned events within the close timeframe, and consisent with the goal of increasing starts, the proposal is to temporarily postpone the fee until say 30 days prior to the event (it currently becomes due for the clubs 14 days after the event). This proposal is revenue-neutral if everyone upholds their end of the deal.
May 11, 2011 8:44 PM
#
There were 186 at large members out of a total of 1991 on the list I received in March, 2011. Of the 186, 90 were schoolkids
Also check how many of the at large members are life members. People in that category are likely to have purchased a life membership back in the 1980s when it was dirt cheap, and since then lost interest in orienteering. (They may have belonged to clubs that no longer exist, or their club memberships may have lapsed.) These people don't really count, either -- we may never hear from them again.
Also check how many of the at large members are life members. People in that category are likely to have purchased a life membership back in the 1980s when it was dirt cheap, and since then lost interest in orienteering. (They may have belonged to clubs that no longer exist, or their club memberships may have lapsed.) These people don't really count, either -- we may never hear from them again.
May 11, 2011 9:10 PM
#
Glen's response is helpful, but I still want to believe that every expenditure in there will directly contribute to increasing starts. I understand motion at a distance, and building the brand, and how that is good for orienteering, but with a finite amount of money I think it is incumbent to avoid the pork.
I see two ingredients (like a Cobb-Douglas, abstractly): 1) opportunities to do orienteering and 2) compulsion to do so. If you want to do orienteering and can't-->no starts; if can, but don't want to--> no starts.
a) Club services, b) magazine enhancements, c) banners, etc... may possibly help, but I am not clear how b and c will contribute to 2, above.
I wish I saw more in here about how orienteering will reach the unwashed, rather than sprinkling the holy water on all of us.
I see two ingredients (like a Cobb-Douglas, abstractly): 1) opportunities to do orienteering and 2) compulsion to do so. If you want to do orienteering and can't-->no starts; if can, but don't want to--> no starts.
a) Club services, b) magazine enhancements, c) banners, etc... may possibly help, but I am not clear how b and c will contribute to 2, above.
I wish I saw more in here about how orienteering will reach the unwashed, rather than sprinkling the holy water on all of us.
May 11, 2011 11:11 PM
#
On paper this plan looks good. The problem I see with this proposed plan is that it will take a large amount of skilled volunteer time over a long period to implement it. Where is this cadre of committed volunteers coming from?
I think there may be a simpler way. Form a small task force that goes out and asks every club to commit to expanding their schedule. This way the expansion effort is spread around to each club.
As I think back 25 years watching BAOC grow from a small club to a large one. There was a commitment for schedule expansion. In recent years that commitment has seemed to wane and the attendance growth has leveled off.
More meets=more attendance=more volunteers=more course setters=more meets=more income=more maps=more A-meets=more income, etc, etc etc.
I think there may be a simpler way. Form a small task force that goes out and asks every club to commit to expanding their schedule. This way the expansion effort is spread around to each club.
As I think back 25 years watching BAOC grow from a small club to a large one. There was a commitment for schedule expansion. In recent years that commitment has seemed to wane and the attendance growth has leveled off.
More meets=more attendance=more volunteers=more course setters=more meets=more income=more maps=more A-meets=more income, etc, etc etc.
May 11, 2011 11:32 PM
#
Advertising to non-orienteers needs to be developed most. I have done a small amount locally for the TT weekend, negligible in terms of hours in comparison to course-setting and other work. Apart from that, the club hasn't done any, afaik. The club is putting in many, many hours to put on a great weekend of races, but doesn't seem to have the balance right. It certainly doesn't seem to have a system for advertising to strangers.
Helping clubs do this is the key. Have as goals email at least five local schools or running stores or whatever for each event. Eventually the numbers will grow.
Stock emails/posters/flyers etc that are easily modifiable are a good thing for OUSA to do. I know some of this stuff has started to appear on the OUSA website, but there could be more/better...
Helping clubs do this is the key. Have as goals email at least five local schools or running stores or whatever for each event. Eventually the numbers will grow.
Stock emails/posters/flyers etc that are easily modifiable are a good thing for OUSA to do. I know some of this stuff has started to appear on the OUSA website, but there could be more/better...
May 12, 2011 12:08 PM
#
All,
I thank you for your comments to date. I will attempt to answer you questions and points later tonight (busy day today). My goal is to clarify as much as possible. I strongly encourage the discussion as a stronger plan will come from it.
In addition, if you are interested in volunteering to work on a small piece of the plan please let me know. We could really use your help.
Glen
I thank you for your comments to date. I will attempt to answer you questions and points later tonight (busy day today). My goal is to clarify as much as possible. I strongly encourage the discussion as a stronger plan will come from it.
In addition, if you are interested in volunteering to work on a small piece of the plan please let me know. We could really use your help.
Glen
May 12, 2011 1:25 PM
#
Thanks Glen. But as I've found when organizing O meets, few respond to a general emailed call for volunteers. I've always had to spend a bit more time to recruit good people, who will really work on specific tasks.
For instance, don't the individual clubs have some responsibility to OUSA to present and promote a viable O program, in exchange for their OUSA sanctioning? Why not lay the responsibility to help with The Plan in the laps of the Club presidents?
Last year OSteve made a first pass at comparing all the OUSA clubs in their effort to (a) generate Starts, (b) recruit members and (c) put on Meets in this spreadsheet. It makes it painfully obvious that some clubs are much more successful than others with these metrics. I've never seen any official recognition of this ground-breaking work...is it on the OUSA radar screen? Can this type of comparison be used to determine which Club presidents to approach first for that "low-hanging fruit?"
For instance, don't the individual clubs have some responsibility to OUSA to present and promote a viable O program, in exchange for their OUSA sanctioning? Why not lay the responsibility to help with The Plan in the laps of the Club presidents?
Last year OSteve made a first pass at comparing all the OUSA clubs in their effort to (a) generate Starts, (b) recruit members and (c) put on Meets in this spreadsheet. It makes it painfully obvious that some clubs are much more successful than others with these metrics. I've never seen any official recognition of this ground-breaking work...is it on the OUSA radar screen? Can this type of comparison be used to determine which Club presidents to approach first for that "low-hanging fruit?"
May 12, 2011 1:47 PM
#
The clubs' primary responsibility is to serve their members. Orienteering USA has a wider mission. Some clubs view growth/marketing as important, and most of the ones who do take steps to achieve growth. Most clubs don't think it's particularly important—not ahead of serving their members' immediate/stated needs. No amount of cajoling by Orienteering USA will make these clubs move much; that's not how they roll.
Orienteering USA should take the lead on this initiative. Punting it down to clubs will be status quo. Orienteering USA simply does not have the levers to make clubs make it happen, and the clubs don't have the innate incentives.
Orienteering USA should take the lead on this initiative. Punting it down to clubs will be status quo. Orienteering USA simply does not have the levers to make clubs make it happen, and the clubs don't have the innate incentives.
May 12, 2011 2:01 PM
#
Orienteering USA simply does not have the levers...
It's a matter of being persuasive with the Club presidents. No one's speaking of forceful top-down communist-era grand "10-year plans."
How about just publishing that OSteve spreadsheet in ONA once a year? As a local club member, I'm not happy seeing my club near the bottom of that list. And I might start looking to elect a new club president if our standing doesn't improve...
It's a matter of being persuasive with the Club presidents. No one's speaking of forceful top-down communist-era grand "10-year plans."
How about just publishing that OSteve spreadsheet in ONA once a year? As a local club member, I'm not happy seeing my club near the bottom of that list. And I might start looking to elect a new club president if our standing doesn't improve...
May 12, 2011 2:07 PM
#
agree with what Neil says
Advertising to non-orienteers needs to be developed most.. local schools or running stores or whatever for each event. Eventually the numbers will grow.
One day, while driving home near a city park, noticed a hundred cars parked and several hundred people crowding the park main lawn. What was going on? I stopped and went to see. It was a cross-country racing event, with all participants being students of catholic schools in the area. It was a great event to see, with tents, cheering, food, BBQ, and lots of families. If one could infiltrate these communities, and get the O bug into them, that would be great.
Advertising to non-orienteers needs to be developed most.. local schools or running stores or whatever for each event. Eventually the numbers will grow.
One day, while driving home near a city park, noticed a hundred cars parked and several hundred people crowding the park main lawn. What was going on? I stopped and went to see. It was a cross-country racing event, with all participants being students of catholic schools in the area. It was a great event to see, with tents, cheering, food, BBQ, and lots of families. If one could infiltrate these communities, and get the O bug into them, that would be great.
May 12, 2011 2:14 PM
#
I notice that the social aspect of clubs isn't discussed. Clubs should be encouraged to promote this. A simple once weekly club run is one good way of getting started on this front. A lot of people run for the social aspect and it's something orienteering clubs in NA don't cater enough to. Ideally these club runs would be with a map in hand but they don't need to be.
I'm not sure if this will directly increase starts but it can't hurt and is something that is so simple to implement.
I'm not sure if this will directly increase starts but it can't hurt and is something that is so simple to implement.
May 12, 2011 2:45 PM
#
I agree. Approaching "few and far between". ;-)
The last question is, of the remaining 50 at-large members, how many have foreign addresses? I don't know whether people like Sandra Lauenstein or Matt Scott maintain membership in a domestic club.
The last question is, of the remaining 50 at-large members, how many have foreign addresses? I don't know whether people like Sandra Lauenstein or Matt Scott maintain membership in a domestic club.
May 12, 2011 3:43 PM
#
Or... take 20k out of some part of the budget and have it as a grant fund. Individual OUSA members (or GetLost! types) can apply with one line or two-page projects.
Like: I would like 3k to pay for maps of two local school grounds and one local uni campus. In return, I will meet with teachers/staff/students and (with club help) put on a four-week introduction to orienteering module open to the students/staff/teachers. Or whatever.
Clubs only do stuff if individuals in the club are motivated. Motivate the individuals.
Like: I would like 3k to pay for maps of two local school grounds and one local uni campus. In return, I will meet with teachers/staff/students and (with club help) put on a four-week introduction to orienteering module open to the students/staff/teachers. Or whatever.
Clubs only do stuff if individuals in the club are motivated. Motivate the individuals.
May 12, 2011 5:15 PM
#
pay for maps of two local school grounds... Motivate the individuals
Even better. Have the high school students do the mapping, maybe for some for of credits in science/geography/math/special project. Then, they would be motivated to use what they created.
At a REI store map & compass workshop, met this young phys/ed teacher from a local high school. She purchased 20 Suunto controls and punches. She needed a map, and ended up using an aerial photo. Would have been great if she had easy access to an OCAD license, data, training.
Even better. Have the high school students do the mapping, maybe for some for of credits in science/geography/math/special project. Then, they would be motivated to use what they created.
At a REI store map & compass workshop, met this young phys/ed teacher from a local high school. She purchased 20 Suunto controls and punches. She needed a map, and ended up using an aerial photo. Would have been great if she had easy access to an OCAD license, data, training.
May 12, 2011 5:50 PM
#
It's a matter of being persuasive with the Club presidents.
You can be persuasive all you want. People aren't going to do what they don't enjoy doing and what they have no vested interest in, unless they are paid. To rely on powers of persuasion to entice volunteers to not only volunteer more, but to volunteer for what they didn't exactly sign up to do in first place? good luck.
And I might start looking to elect a new club president if our standing doesn't improve...
... and the standing president may well be overjoyed that someone else is elected to do the hapless task. The problem is that the incentives aren't right. Is any club interested in growth? tangentially, maybe. As in "we need bodies to assist us in making our recreational activity happen", not usually as in "we would like more bodies, period". Some clubs did surveys. Growth wasn't the number one priority of any that I heard of. More events; yes. More volunteers; yes. More people at events? not the ones I've seen. Are any club presidents incentivized to make growth happen? No. They are there to serve the club's existing members.
It is the job of Orienteering USA to put the incentives in place. Clubs don't have the foresight nor manpower. Most importantly, they are usually structured as member-service organizations with missions that do not include growth as an organic ingredient.
You can be persuasive all you want. People aren't going to do what they don't enjoy doing and what they have no vested interest in, unless they are paid. To rely on powers of persuasion to entice volunteers to not only volunteer more, but to volunteer for what they didn't exactly sign up to do in first place? good luck.
And I might start looking to elect a new club president if our standing doesn't improve...
... and the standing president may well be overjoyed that someone else is elected to do the hapless task. The problem is that the incentives aren't right. Is any club interested in growth? tangentially, maybe. As in "we need bodies to assist us in making our recreational activity happen", not usually as in "we would like more bodies, period". Some clubs did surveys. Growth wasn't the number one priority of any that I heard of. More events; yes. More volunteers; yes. More people at events? not the ones I've seen. Are any club presidents incentivized to make growth happen? No. They are there to serve the club's existing members.
It is the job of Orienteering USA to put the incentives in place. Clubs don't have the foresight nor manpower. Most importantly, they are usually structured as member-service organizations with missions that do not include growth as an organic ingredient.
May 12, 2011 6:09 PM
#
Would have been great if she had easy access to an OCAD license, data, training.
No, it would have made the project drag on longer without a discernible difference as to its output.
It's great the kids got introduced to maps and navigating. The fact that the map wasn't in perfect symbols is a minor feature.
There is a place in this world for perfection. Perfection takes time and skill. When there are two levels—nothing and perfection—the barrier to entry is at its greatest. What we need is several levels in-between.
Maps are closer to being within reach of everyone in every country of the world now than ever. People who wouldn't have touched a paper map are accustomed now to maps on their GPS device and their smartphone. Technology is on everyone's laptop.
We have a chance to leverage this, or to insist on perfection right away.
No, it would have made the project drag on longer without a discernible difference as to its output.
It's great the kids got introduced to maps and navigating. The fact that the map wasn't in perfect symbols is a minor feature.
There is a place in this world for perfection. Perfection takes time and skill. When there are two levels—nothing and perfection—the barrier to entry is at its greatest. What we need is several levels in-between.
Maps are closer to being within reach of everyone in every country of the world now than ever. People who wouldn't have touched a paper map are accustomed now to maps on their GPS device and their smartphone. Technology is on everyone's laptop.
We have a chance to leverage this, or to insist on perfection right away.
May 12, 2011 7:53 PM
#
To drive the point home about the existing clubs being ill fit for being tasked with growth, look at this survey. This is one of the most successful North American clubs that puts on some 40 events each year, two or three A meets.
Are there questions in this survey along the lines of "How can we the club better serve the public?" or even "How can we attract the public so that it would help us serve ourselves in the future?" No. Just about every non-demographic question is about the club members serving themselves, and how to possibly enhance this experience.
Now the members seem to find that curious—subconsciously or not—and offer a slew of suggestions in their answers to Question 43, "What changes would you like to see?" Most of these suggestions involve somehow bringing in new blood. But whoever made up the questionnaire, presumably the club's leadership, didn't seem to have this particular concept on the front burner.
Serving existing members well will yield some growth, but perhaps in an organization as advanced as this club, the intrinsic limit of the model has already been reached, or is nearing exhaustion. Asking the volunteers to do more eventually won't yield more. Proof is in the answers to Question 39. To paraphrase, "What can encourage you do more for the club?" Summary: "Being unemployed or retired."
Also note that some recipes for serving existing members well should also work great for bringing in new blood; and some are quite contrary to the goal. At a certain level, these goals aren't exactly aligned. Examples... what do club members want? E-punching. Prompt results. Food. Social activities. Weekday training. (Questions 16 and 24.) These should work well with all, newbies and long-time members alike. But what do club members want the most (Question 23)?
The members, overwhelmingly, desire a regular seven-course event. Everything else receives, collectively, a resounding meh. But the regular seven-course event is the most labor- and resource-intensive undertaking of all listed, hands down; it is the one most "hidden in the woods"; and it arguably presents the highest barrier to entry for newbies.
Some of the answers are quite illuminating if you try to discern the question that was answered but wasn't asked. Less than 12% view registration duties appealing or very appealing; yet only one or two Orienteering USA clubs offer preregistration for their events. Members resoundingly want e-punch, but few want to work e-punch. And the best question that wasn't asked—and wasn't answered—is whether the club needs better maps. Note that not a single person is screaming that the maps aren't excellent. And this is in the Bay Area, where perhaps half the maps were made before 2000 by non-A-list mappers using obsolete technology.
And yet where does most of the club's budget go? to make more maps, access to some of which is promptly lost. And mappers are the only personnel whom this particular club approves compensating. In this club, not even event directors' expenses are fully reimbursed; people are constantly asked to volunteer and pitch in their own money for gas, hotel stays, and supplies.
A blasphemous question: What would happen to a club if half of its mapping budget were to go to advertising, promotion, and recruitment? If there aren't qualified or willing volunteers to do the task with decent return—there aren't—how about paying a professional?
I now rest my case.
Are there questions in this survey along the lines of "How can we the club better serve the public?" or even "How can we attract the public so that it would help us serve ourselves in the future?" No. Just about every non-demographic question is about the club members serving themselves, and how to possibly enhance this experience.
Now the members seem to find that curious—subconsciously or not—and offer a slew of suggestions in their answers to Question 43, "What changes would you like to see?" Most of these suggestions involve somehow bringing in new blood. But whoever made up the questionnaire, presumably the club's leadership, didn't seem to have this particular concept on the front burner.
Serving existing members well will yield some growth, but perhaps in an organization as advanced as this club, the intrinsic limit of the model has already been reached, or is nearing exhaustion. Asking the volunteers to do more eventually won't yield more. Proof is in the answers to Question 39. To paraphrase, "What can encourage you do more for the club?" Summary: "Being unemployed or retired."
Also note that some recipes for serving existing members well should also work great for bringing in new blood; and some are quite contrary to the goal. At a certain level, these goals aren't exactly aligned. Examples... what do club members want? E-punching. Prompt results. Food. Social activities. Weekday training. (Questions 16 and 24.) These should work well with all, newbies and long-time members alike. But what do club members want the most (Question 23)?
The members, overwhelmingly, desire a regular seven-course event. Everything else receives, collectively, a resounding meh. But the regular seven-course event is the most labor- and resource-intensive undertaking of all listed, hands down; it is the one most "hidden in the woods"; and it arguably presents the highest barrier to entry for newbies.
Some of the answers are quite illuminating if you try to discern the question that was answered but wasn't asked. Less than 12% view registration duties appealing or very appealing; yet only one or two Orienteering USA clubs offer preregistration for their events. Members resoundingly want e-punch, but few want to work e-punch. And the best question that wasn't asked—and wasn't answered—is whether the club needs better maps. Note that not a single person is screaming that the maps aren't excellent. And this is in the Bay Area, where perhaps half the maps were made before 2000 by non-A-list mappers using obsolete technology.
And yet where does most of the club's budget go? to make more maps, access to some of which is promptly lost. And mappers are the only personnel whom this particular club approves compensating. In this club, not even event directors' expenses are fully reimbursed; people are constantly asked to volunteer and pitch in their own money for gas, hotel stays, and supplies.
A blasphemous question: What would happen to a club if half of its mapping budget were to go to advertising, promotion, and recruitment? If there aren't qualified or willing volunteers to do the task with decent return—there aren't—how about paying a professional?
I now rest my case.
May 12, 2011 9:00 PM
#
"What can encourage you do more for the club?" Summary: "Being unemployed or retired."
It won't be much help in the time frame of the strategic plan but at least this suggests that the problem of limited volunteer resources may not require action to solve in the long term - eventually, as the orienteering population ages, enough orienteers will be retired to flood the country with orienteering events in their ample spare time. In the meantime, I'm glad to see the elements of this plan related to allowing NCOs to organise sanctioned events. I'm not entirely certain how that will work but I'm happy to believe Rex, Vlad and Eric wouldn't be pushing it if it weren't feasible. Speaking for myself, I certainly haven't reached the upper limit on the number of A meets I would attend if there were more of them to choose from close to me but I'm probably at my upper limit for A meets beyond practical driving distance for weekend trips including orienteering both days. If allowing for profit involvement can produce an A meet in the US Pacific Northwest this year where there otherwise wouldn't be one, great, though I'm very unlikely to attend myself. My dream would be for it to result in annual Harriman A meets, since I don't see any sign of HVO and DVOA, much appreciated though the A meets and other events they have run in Harriman in recent years are, making that happen anytime soon.
It won't be much help in the time frame of the strategic plan but at least this suggests that the problem of limited volunteer resources may not require action to solve in the long term - eventually, as the orienteering population ages, enough orienteers will be retired to flood the country with orienteering events in their ample spare time. In the meantime, I'm glad to see the elements of this plan related to allowing NCOs to organise sanctioned events. I'm not entirely certain how that will work but I'm happy to believe Rex, Vlad and Eric wouldn't be pushing it if it weren't feasible. Speaking for myself, I certainly haven't reached the upper limit on the number of A meets I would attend if there were more of them to choose from close to me but I'm probably at my upper limit for A meets beyond practical driving distance for weekend trips including orienteering both days. If allowing for profit involvement can produce an A meet in the US Pacific Northwest this year where there otherwise wouldn't be one, great, though I'm very unlikely to attend myself. My dream would be for it to result in annual Harriman A meets, since I don't see any sign of HVO and DVOA, much appreciated though the A meets and other events they have run in Harriman in recent years are, making that happen anytime soon.
May 13, 2011 9:01 AM
#
Most of these suggestions involve somehow bringing in new blood
For those that remember the MCI phone company marketing program called Friends & Family, i wonder if it would work here, in which if a current member brings in a new member, he/she gets a discount.
Or, to be used at recurring yearly special events, such as a mini-rogaine, where returning participants get a 25% discount if they enlist new people.
For those that remember the MCI phone company marketing program called Friends & Family, i wonder if it would work here, in which if a current member brings in a new member, he/she gets a discount.
Or, to be used at recurring yearly special events, such as a mini-rogaine, where returning participants get a 25% discount if they enlist new people.
May 13, 2011 12:46 PM
#
Whats the incentive to be "sanctioned" by OUSA?
If the event is a local event and is well planned, will anyone outside of Orienteering (or inside) really care?
If the event is a local event and is well planned, will anyone outside of Orienteering (or inside) really care?
May 13, 2011 2:30 PM
#
Umm... event quality isn't something that can simply be assumed. OUSA sanctioned events aren't guaranteed to be technically perfect but at least I know what standards they'll be doing their best to meet and that the organisers convinced the sanctioning committee (board? whatever the nomenclature is) that they were capable of meeting them adequately. If anyone tried to put on something equivalent to an A meet in North America without OUSA or COF sanctioning, I'd have no idea whether they were up to it or not. Many adventure race organisers certainly wouldn't be. I'd have to research their track record, if they have one. Despite any wariness on my part, I might end up taking a chance on what turned out to be a sub-par event. There's definitely an incentive to be sanctioned, if you want me to use up some of my limited money and free time participating in your event.
May 13, 2011 3:28 PM
#
While some clubs/people are known to put on a high-quality event whether it is sanctioned or not, the country's too big not to have some kind of quality-assurance from the governing body. While I have been known to fly across the country for an event that was not sanctioned, those were rare cases...
May 13, 2011 4:56 PM
#
I think many of us take for granted the high level of organization, technology and sophistication of the average orienteering event, whether sanctioned by OUSA, or merely presented locally by an OUSA-sanctioned club.
In the Chicago area "orienteering" events are presented by many organizations...and sometimes for profit. As a matter of fact, my first exposure to O was at an event put on by the local Sierra Club outings group. The outing was presented mostly as a compass exercise...following lines of bearing across a primitive map where marshes were designated by little graphic tufts of grass, etc. It was terrible; everyone was lost. And it took EIGHT years for me to try another O event...this one thankfully, presented by CAOC...an OUSA-sanctioned club. I was immediately hooked.
OUSA events used to have more USOF oversight; for my first A-meet as Meet Director in 1992 we enjoyed a two-day visit by the Course Consultant. But that was before the WWW, email and OCAD. It just was easier to visit.
Today I'm not sure how much Quality Control goes on. In our local club we definitely know certain individuals that should not be asked to set courses or direct meets based on past problems. But how much does OUSA do to ensure the quality of local and A-meets IN ADVANCE? Are event sanctioning requests denied by OUSA when past events have indicated lapses? Do certain clubs get closer scrutiny during their event planning and course setting to make sure past A-meet mistakes are not repeated?
My point, that Tundra-Dessert disputes, is that certain Starts and Membership goals should be set for OUSA clubs too. And by use of OSteve's innovative spreadsheet, some kind of grading system could be established, to identify which clubs could use more help meeting those goals. And also to "cross-pollinate" some of the successful ideas to everyone. It could be a win-win-win situation for the club, OUSA, and all of us orienteers.
True...volunteers cannot be forced to do anything they don't want to do. But by effective use of informational and motivational tools, can't some of the lower-performing clubs be persuaded to try harder?
In the Chicago area "orienteering" events are presented by many organizations...and sometimes for profit. As a matter of fact, my first exposure to O was at an event put on by the local Sierra Club outings group. The outing was presented mostly as a compass exercise...following lines of bearing across a primitive map where marshes were designated by little graphic tufts of grass, etc. It was terrible; everyone was lost. And it took EIGHT years for me to try another O event...this one thankfully, presented by CAOC...an OUSA-sanctioned club. I was immediately hooked.
OUSA events used to have more USOF oversight; for my first A-meet as Meet Director in 1992 we enjoyed a two-day visit by the Course Consultant. But that was before the WWW, email and OCAD. It just was easier to visit.
Today I'm not sure how much Quality Control goes on. In our local club we definitely know certain individuals that should not be asked to set courses or direct meets based on past problems. But how much does OUSA do to ensure the quality of local and A-meets IN ADVANCE? Are event sanctioning requests denied by OUSA when past events have indicated lapses? Do certain clubs get closer scrutiny during their event planning and course setting to make sure past A-meet mistakes are not repeated?
My point, that Tundra-Dessert disputes, is that certain Starts and Membership goals should be set for OUSA clubs too. And by use of OSteve's innovative spreadsheet, some kind of grading system could be established, to identify which clubs could use more help meeting those goals. And also to "cross-pollinate" some of the successful ideas to everyone. It could be a win-win-win situation for the club, OUSA, and all of us orienteers.
True...volunteers cannot be forced to do anything they don't want to do. But by effective use of informational and motivational tools, can't some of the lower-performing clubs be persuaded to try harder?
May 13, 2011 5:15 PM
#
There are meet and course design 'guidelines' on the OUSA website,
http://orienteeringusa.org/event-organizers/standa...
These are just guidelines, written a number of years ago. If you would like us to start a "best practices" section, send me your suggestions and I'll add that information. Usofweb {at} gmail {dot} com
http://orienteeringusa.org/event-organizers/standa...
These are just guidelines, written a number of years ago. If you would like us to start a "best practices" section, send me your suggestions and I'll add that information. Usofweb {at} gmail {dot} com
May 13, 2011 5:33 PM
#
OSteve's innovative spreadsheet
the population size data can't be right. For example for club WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA OC, it reports 400,000 inhabitants. It should be more at around 1.5 million, and that's for just three counties closest to event venues.
the population size data can't be right. For example for club WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA OC, it reports 400,000 inhabitants. It should be more at around 1.5 million, and that's for just three counties closest to event venues.
May 13, 2011 7:18 PM
#
Well it's a first-pass, and OSteve assembled all those numbers himself; I'm sure that there are a lot of adjustments and refinements that might be appropriate.
But as I understand it, the population data was based upon Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas published by the US Census, massaged a bit to only include people within a two-hour drive of the club's primary maps.
But as I understand it, the population data was based upon Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas published by the US Census, massaged a bit to only include people within a two-hour drive of the club's primary maps.
May 13, 2011 10:16 PM
#
The idea of what constitutes a "quality meet" for the purpose of holding national championships, and supporting national rankings for elite orienteers who travel nationally and internationally... is a very different thing from the idea of a "quality meet" that will capture the imagination of newcomers, retain their interest, and provide the appropriate stepping stones to build skills while retaining a sense of fun.
The inability of O-USA to distinguish between these often divergent goals, I think, has a lot to do with the stagnation of orienteering growth nationwide. Look at the course design guidelines that JanetT cited. Even the C-meet guidelines imply that the ideal event consists of 2 beginner courses, 1 intermediate courses, and 4 advanced courses. This is a completely sensible breakdown if you are trying to support national age categories for a group of highly experienced orienteers. But it's a completely ridiculous misallocation of resources if you are trying to build a strong local orienteering scene from scratch.
The inability of O-USA to distinguish between these often divergent goals, I think, has a lot to do with the stagnation of orienteering growth nationwide. Look at the course design guidelines that JanetT cited. Even the C-meet guidelines imply that the ideal event consists of 2 beginner courses, 1 intermediate courses, and 4 advanced courses. This is a completely sensible breakdown if you are trying to support national age categories for a group of highly experienced orienteers. But it's a completely ridiculous misallocation of resources if you are trying to build a strong local orienteering scene from scratch.
May 14, 2011 1:04 AM
#
I am presently the person in charge of course consulting coordination. The process is not perfect but it seems to help in getting good courses for A-meets. Course consultants work with course setters and indicate problem areas. They are not "controllers" who can demand changes in courses, but they also do not generally go to the event site. It has been said that with email and digital maps that things have changed. Course consultants will defer to the wisdom of the course setter who knows the area better but the consultants will often suggest large changes to courses and very often will suggest smaller ones. Recently, one course consultant was worried about the length of the courses, feeling that they were too long. The course setter did not feel that they were too long based on the terrain and it turned out that the courses were of appropriate length. This shows that the consultant was thinking about issues, brought them to the attention of the course setter and then the "feet on the ground" point of view said that the courses were OK. It was good to have the consultant point out the potential problem an it was good that the course setter took that information, processed it and made an appropriate decision.
May 15, 2011 4:21 AM
#
Some comments from this thread:
I wish I saw more in here about how orienteering will reach the unwashed, rather than sprinkling the holy water on all of us. -jman
Advertising to non-orienteers needs to be developed most. -ndobbs
A lot of people run for the social aspect and it's something orienteering clubs in NA don't cater enough to. Ideally these club runs would be with a map in hand but they don't need to be. I'm not sure if this will directly increase starts but it can't hurt and is something that is so simple to implement. -jteutsch
It's great the kids got introduced to maps and navigating. The fact that the map wasn't in perfect symbols is a minor feature.
There is a place in this world for perfection. Perfection takes time and skill. When there are two levels—nothing and perfection—the barrier to entry is at its greatest. What we need is several levels in-between.
Maps are closer to being within reach of everyone in every country of the world now than ever. -Tundra/Desert
The members, overwhelmingly, desire a regular seven-course event. Everything else receives, collectively, a resounding meh. But the regular seven-course event is the most labor- and resource-intensive undertaking of all listed, hands down; it is the one most "hidden in the woods"; and it arguably presents the highest barrier to entry for newbies. - Tundra/Desert
The idea of what constitutes a "quality meet" for the purpose of holding national championships, and supporting national rankings for elite orienteers who travel nationally and internationally... is a very different thing from the idea of a "quality meet" that will capture the imagination of newcomers, retain their interest, and provide the appropriate stepping stones to build skills while retaining a sense of fun. - blegg
--------------
And some more comments from the Thursday Adventure Runs thread:
it's totally possible to make Score-O events that are, in reality, beginner friendly, but still market them as extreme adventure without any apparent conflict. In fact, I've sent families with 10 year old kids out on the exact same Score-O course as world class adventure racing teams, and both came back totally satisfied. Pulling that off with a traditional orienteering course is a whole lot harder.
More important, when creating a culture for young adults: the Score-O has huge social engineering advantages.
The mass start event and tight finish window gives more control over race atmosphere, and plenty of social interaction. People see other people on their course, maybe even do some head-to-head racing! Food, drinks, and award ceremonies work so much better! You create the shared social experience that people are looking for in their activities. -blegg
A few years ago, noticed that all the young folks were going to these "adventure" format events, but never to the "old people" orienteering events... Basically, the O club has strengths in map making, using OCAD, vetting. The adv race clubs have strengths in attracting young folks and jazzing and sexxing up an event. -Sherpes
--------------
I think there's a lot of overlap in these two threads, and it comes down to quantity and quality, and the determinations of each. It seems like the current definition of "quality" is a seven-course event on the local level, and an officially sanctioned event on the national level. Which is all well and good except for two key things:
1) It's very labor intensive (mapping, setting, results, volunteers)
2) It's not good at bringing in newcomers
And because the most-desired aspects of these events are the most labor-intensive, less focus is put on recruiting and retaining newbies. And since we can't retain the newbies, we have less people involved with the organization, which means less volunteers for the labor. Sounds like a downward spiral.
But if we also focus on a new definition of "quality"? One that emphasizes more on the race and social atmospheres, and building a more sustainable orienteering community.
There are good suggestions out there, and ones that seem to work. Schedule more score-o events. As mentioned, they work for beginners and up. Everyone starts at the same time. Everyone finishes together. Amp up the social interaction! And score-o's are much easier to design, which quickly increases your pool of capable course setters (for example, 9 of the first 12 'Hood Hunts were designed by people who had never set an orienteering course before). And with the condensed start and finish window, you can pull off an event with fewer volunteers.
Also, we don't always need to use perfect orienteering maps. Without the constraint of having this "perfection", you don't need to spend as much time on the mapping, and you can have events pretty much anywhere you want. Street Scrambles use USGS maps, 'Hood Hunts use either Google or county maps, and the competitors at Thursday Adventure Runs mostly rely on maps on their smartphones. And at these events, nobody complains about the map quality! With less focus on the quality of perfection, you can focus on hosting more events. More events = more starts = more exposure.
So what we need is another effort like the Sprint Series. I'd propose something like a "National Adventure Run Series". Grassroots score-o events, yet all over the country. Any club or NCO can host at any location they want. Urban, terrain, whatever. Just get maps in people's hands. We need the exposure.
I wish I saw more in here about how orienteering will reach the unwashed, rather than sprinkling the holy water on all of us. -jman
Advertising to non-orienteers needs to be developed most. -ndobbs
A lot of people run for the social aspect and it's something orienteering clubs in NA don't cater enough to. Ideally these club runs would be with a map in hand but they don't need to be. I'm not sure if this will directly increase starts but it can't hurt and is something that is so simple to implement. -jteutsch
It's great the kids got introduced to maps and navigating. The fact that the map wasn't in perfect symbols is a minor feature.
There is a place in this world for perfection. Perfection takes time and skill. When there are two levels—nothing and perfection—the barrier to entry is at its greatest. What we need is several levels in-between.
Maps are closer to being within reach of everyone in every country of the world now than ever. -Tundra/Desert
The members, overwhelmingly, desire a regular seven-course event. Everything else receives, collectively, a resounding meh. But the regular seven-course event is the most labor- and resource-intensive undertaking of all listed, hands down; it is the one most "hidden in the woods"; and it arguably presents the highest barrier to entry for newbies. - Tundra/Desert
The idea of what constitutes a "quality meet" for the purpose of holding national championships, and supporting national rankings for elite orienteers who travel nationally and internationally... is a very different thing from the idea of a "quality meet" that will capture the imagination of newcomers, retain their interest, and provide the appropriate stepping stones to build skills while retaining a sense of fun. - blegg
--------------
And some more comments from the Thursday Adventure Runs thread:
it's totally possible to make Score-O events that are, in reality, beginner friendly, but still market them as extreme adventure without any apparent conflict. In fact, I've sent families with 10 year old kids out on the exact same Score-O course as world class adventure racing teams, and both came back totally satisfied. Pulling that off with a traditional orienteering course is a whole lot harder.
More important, when creating a culture for young adults: the Score-O has huge social engineering advantages.
The mass start event and tight finish window gives more control over race atmosphere, and plenty of social interaction. People see other people on their course, maybe even do some head-to-head racing! Food, drinks, and award ceremonies work so much better! You create the shared social experience that people are looking for in their activities. -blegg
A few years ago, noticed that all the young folks were going to these "adventure" format events, but never to the "old people" orienteering events... Basically, the O club has strengths in map making, using OCAD, vetting. The adv race clubs have strengths in attracting young folks and jazzing and sexxing up an event. -Sherpes
--------------
I think there's a lot of overlap in these two threads, and it comes down to quantity and quality, and the determinations of each. It seems like the current definition of "quality" is a seven-course event on the local level, and an officially sanctioned event on the national level. Which is all well and good except for two key things:
1) It's very labor intensive (mapping, setting, results, volunteers)
2) It's not good at bringing in newcomers
And because the most-desired aspects of these events are the most labor-intensive, less focus is put on recruiting and retaining newbies. And since we can't retain the newbies, we have less people involved with the organization, which means less volunteers for the labor. Sounds like a downward spiral.
But if we also focus on a new definition of "quality"? One that emphasizes more on the race and social atmospheres, and building a more sustainable orienteering community.
There are good suggestions out there, and ones that seem to work. Schedule more score-o events. As mentioned, they work for beginners and up. Everyone starts at the same time. Everyone finishes together. Amp up the social interaction! And score-o's are much easier to design, which quickly increases your pool of capable course setters (for example, 9 of the first 12 'Hood Hunts were designed by people who had never set an orienteering course before). And with the condensed start and finish window, you can pull off an event with fewer volunteers.
Also, we don't always need to use perfect orienteering maps. Without the constraint of having this "perfection", you don't need to spend as much time on the mapping, and you can have events pretty much anywhere you want. Street Scrambles use USGS maps, 'Hood Hunts use either Google or county maps, and the competitors at Thursday Adventure Runs mostly rely on maps on their smartphones. And at these events, nobody complains about the map quality! With less focus on the quality of perfection, you can focus on hosting more events. More events = more starts = more exposure.
So what we need is another effort like the Sprint Series. I'd propose something like a "National Adventure Run Series". Grassroots score-o events, yet all over the country. Any club or NCO can host at any location they want. Urban, terrain, whatever. Just get maps in people's hands. We need the exposure.
May 15, 2011 9:23 AM
#
but mass start makes it easier from an organisation point of view, and it keeps the race compact.
Normal event, 3hr start window + ~2hrs till course close from last start.
Mass start, 60min score. Everyone finished within 90mins.
Normal event, 3hr start window + ~2hrs till course close from last start.
Mass start, 60min score. Everyone finished within 90mins.
May 15, 2011 4:12 PM
#
Mass start score O certainly have a very different social feel to them as well as having something for all levels to enjoy before ( when milling around waiting for the start, during , and comparing notes right after the actual event) . Everyone except one person (who stays back and watches over club stuff ) gets to compete together. With e-punch event score O results are done within 2- 5 minutes of the end of the allotted time , and control retrieval is done within ~30 minutes of the end of allotted time .
MNOC has switched to this format for winter meets since they are so much more compact and easier to organize, more social, friendly to all levels and score O mass start has less follow the tracks in the snow problem)
MNOC has switched to this format for winter meets since they are so much more compact and easier to organize, more social, friendly to all levels and score O mass start has less follow the tracks in the snow problem)
May 15, 2011 7:27 PM
#
GuyO:
I would add that mass starts can be less beginnner-friendly because...
1) A fixed start time is inflexible, thereby limiting who can participate
2) Could be intimidating to beginners who start as recreational
That said, neither of these (particularly #2) are fatal flaws of mass-start score-Os; just something to consider regarding your target market.
1) A fixed start time is inflexible, thereby limiting who can participate
2) Could be intimidating to beginners who start as recreational
That said, neither of these (particularly #2) are fatal flaws of mass-start score-Os; just something to consider regarding your target market.
May 15, 2011 7:34 PM
#
We've had some input from rank beginners who find the score-O format a bit intimidating, compared to say a White course, where it's very clear where you need to go and in what order (and the control locations, of course, are carefully chosen to be very beginner friendly). As opposed to a score-O where you not only need to find controls, you need to figure out some sort of strategy for what controls to do and in what order (and you may choose some controls that are too challenging).
What we have done for the past few years during our summer meets (which are usually score-O's) is to also offer a White course for people who prefer that format. (And we get a fair number of people opting for the White course.)
I certainly agree about the advantages of score-O's in terms of compactness of time, and fewer meet workers needed.
What we have done for the past few years during our summer meets (which are usually score-O's) is to also offer a White course for people who prefer that format. (And we get a fair number of people opting for the White course.)
I certainly agree about the advantages of score-O's in terms of compactness of time, and fewer meet workers needed.
May 15, 2011 7:38 PM
#
ROC has three phases to the year:
- Regular events Sat/Sun with WYOBGR courses, epunch
- Summer Sprint/White/Score-O events
- Winter Ski-O
The regular events happen on either side of the summer and we generally get three in before and after - the 6 make up the "Regular Club Championship Series".
The Summer events include a Sprint and White course that opens 1 hr before the score-o, the 6 sprints form the "Club Sprint Championship Series". These happen both on weekends and weekdays - with a shorter footprint, we can get them completed before dark. (about 2 hours of competition time)
Winter includes Ski-O with score-O as a fallback for no snow.
The Series work well to encourage consistent participation and a sense of competition locally. I'd encourage you to look over the results from 2010 at http://roc.us.orienteering.org/results.shtml
- Regular events Sat/Sun with WYOBGR courses, epunch
- Summer Sprint/White/Score-O events
- Winter Ski-O
The regular events happen on either side of the summer and we generally get three in before and after - the 6 make up the "Regular Club Championship Series".
The Summer events include a Sprint and White course that opens 1 hr before the score-o, the 6 sprints form the "Club Sprint Championship Series". These happen both on weekends and weekdays - with a shorter footprint, we can get them completed before dark. (about 2 hours of competition time)
Winter includes Ski-O with score-O as a fallback for no snow.
The Series work well to encourage consistent participation and a sense of competition locally. I'd encourage you to look over the results from 2010 at http://roc.us.orienteering.org/results.shtml
May 15, 2011 9:34 PM
#
Street Scrambles use USGS maps
We started with copying the Seattle model at the Bay Area Street Scramble events, but quickly realized that the amount of cartographic work required in order to make decades-old USGS maps usable and reasonably fair is much more than we can devote. So, the current model calls for using OpenStreetMap with superimposed contours, derived from a USGS DEM. The largest drawback of this model is that we lose the copyright to our creation, but it is more than outweighed by having an up-to-date map made for us.
We started with copying the Seattle model at the Bay Area Street Scramble events, but quickly realized that the amount of cartographic work required in order to make decades-old USGS maps usable and reasonably fair is much more than we can devote. So, the current model calls for using OpenStreetMap with superimposed contours, derived from a USGS DEM. The largest drawback of this model is that we lose the copyright to our creation, but it is more than outweighed by having an up-to-date map made for us.
May 15, 2011 9:58 PM
#
Regarding score-O format, obviously a mass start is not necessary, but I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Remember that you can overcome any intimidation factor (as mentioned by GuyO and RLShadow) by pre-issuing maps, which is standard practice at rogaines. 30 minutes gives plenty of chance for newbies to ask questions and develop strategy. If you do the mass start right, the thrill of a group experience should outweigh the intimidation factor quickly. As an old mentor of mine might put it, the mass start can be used as a "ritual of incorporation" that brings participants into the larger group.
I was conducting a review of BAOC course setting guidelines yesterday, and was shocked to find that they mandate offering white and yellow (beginner) courses to accompany any Score-O event. There are logical reasons behind this, but if you're trying to attract young adults, it's completely clueless. Take an event format that is ready-made for beginners and then send the beginners out on something else? Take an event that is perfectly designed to provide a shared experience, and then undercut that by segregating the beginners? Similar questions should be asked about sprint course event design.
I think this just shows how little solid guidance we have when it comes to the beginner experience.
I was conducting a review of BAOC course setting guidelines yesterday, and was shocked to find that they mandate offering white and yellow (beginner) courses to accompany any Score-O event. There are logical reasons behind this, but if you're trying to attract young adults, it's completely clueless. Take an event format that is ready-made for beginners and then send the beginners out on something else? Take an event that is perfectly designed to provide a shared experience, and then undercut that by segregating the beginners? Similar questions should be asked about sprint course event design.
I think this just shows how little solid guidance we have when it comes to the beginner experience.
May 15, 2011 10:06 PM
#
Also... If you are REALLY concerned about making the Score-O format accessible and less intimidating to white level runners, you could even provide a "recommended beginner strategy" that highlights the easy to find checkpoints. Now the white course becomes a subset of the bigger score-o. There are simple ways to do this stuff, but the orienteering community hasn't internalized them, or even spent much time figuring them out.
May 16, 2011 1:36 AM
#
Mass starts are probably not that intimidating to beginners -- after all, it's what happens in almost every kind of non-orienteering race.
May 16, 2011 2:22 AM
#
Apprehension from competitors is normally just a reflection of apprehension in the organizers. If you send them out with confidence and a clearly defined mission, they will go out with confidence.
Of course, what really matters is how they feel when they return. If you send them out with false confidence... unpleasantness may ensue.
Of course, what really matters is how they feel when they return. If you send them out with false confidence... unpleasantness may ensue.
May 16, 2011 3:36 AM
#
Rather late to be chiming in but...
"Explore new OUSA Club Membership Income Arrangement" - why? What is the perceived problem or problems with the current arrangement that the proposed exploratory committee would try to come up with a way to address.
Some progress on OUSA membership numbers may certainly be possibly by making them available for sale and renewal online and by marketing them to club members more effectively but I can't help thinking the root of the problem there is that the benefits of OUSA membership are not sufficiently compelling to most of the potential membership pool. Maybe they can be shown the error of their ways. Maybe the benefits need to be made more compelling. Or the hard slog of turning people happy in their local clubs into people who are involved in the national orienteering scene who would then find the benefits of OUSA membership compelling may be unavoidable.
I'm underwhelmed by the proposed $2 rebate to clubs for each new I or F membership. Is any club going to be motivated to do anything by that amount?
I'm also doubtful that the starts competition will have much impact on anything clubs do. Fees charged to participants are already the main revenue stream for most clubs, aren't they? I think money is already doing what it can to motivate clubs to increase starts. Better, in my opinion, to spend the money on some other part of the plan or not spend it at all until another worthy initiative is conceived, even if various issues with the fairness or lack thereof of the competition as sketched out were addressed.
Going by recent discussion, the "Don't be afraid to reinvent the sport. Adapt event to accommodate new orienteers." part could stand to be fleshed out further. How much do we know about not only what kinds of events attract new orienteers but what kinds of events are most successful in turning them into repeat/long term orienteers? If there's a club in North America that has cracked this nut and is enormously outperforming what one would expect in the way of membership recruitment and retention based on its circumstances, I'm not aware of it but may be I should study that spreadsheet some more. Speaking of which, a 2010 version ought to be possible now, oughtn't it?
"Explore new OUSA Club Membership Income Arrangement" - why? What is the perceived problem or problems with the current arrangement that the proposed exploratory committee would try to come up with a way to address.
Some progress on OUSA membership numbers may certainly be possibly by making them available for sale and renewal online and by marketing them to club members more effectively but I can't help thinking the root of the problem there is that the benefits of OUSA membership are not sufficiently compelling to most of the potential membership pool. Maybe they can be shown the error of their ways. Maybe the benefits need to be made more compelling. Or the hard slog of turning people happy in their local clubs into people who are involved in the national orienteering scene who would then find the benefits of OUSA membership compelling may be unavoidable.
I'm underwhelmed by the proposed $2 rebate to clubs for each new I or F membership. Is any club going to be motivated to do anything by that amount?
I'm also doubtful that the starts competition will have much impact on anything clubs do. Fees charged to participants are already the main revenue stream for most clubs, aren't they? I think money is already doing what it can to motivate clubs to increase starts. Better, in my opinion, to spend the money on some other part of the plan or not spend it at all until another worthy initiative is conceived, even if various issues with the fairness or lack thereof of the competition as sketched out were addressed.
Going by recent discussion, the "Don't be afraid to reinvent the sport. Adapt event to accommodate new orienteers." part could stand to be fleshed out further. How much do we know about not only what kinds of events attract new orienteers but what kinds of events are most successful in turning them into repeat/long term orienteers? If there's a club in North America that has cracked this nut and is enormously outperforming what one would expect in the way of membership recruitment and retention based on its circumstances, I'm not aware of it but may be I should study that spreadsheet some more. Speaking of which, a 2010 version ought to be possible now, oughtn't it?
May 16, 2011 11:38 AM
#
If there's a club in North America that has cracked this nut and is enormously outperforming what one would expect in the way of membership recruitment and retention based on its circumstances
There is one. It's called Meridian Geographics and it's not a club. Thanks to the job MerGeo does in marketing map activities, a lot of the newcomers become Cascade's regulars. Proof: Cascade OC is Orienteering USA's largest club source of income in 2010 while only fourth in member numbers.
There is one. It's called Meridian Geographics and it's not a club. Thanks to the job MerGeo does in marketing map activities, a lot of the newcomers become Cascade's regulars. Proof: Cascade OC is Orienteering USA's largest club source of income in 2010 while only fourth in member numbers.
May 16, 2011 12:56 PM
#
I'm heartened to see that the discussion is shifting from marketing to product as being the problem, as there is no doubt in my mind that it is a product issue, not a marketing issue.
Good products market themselves. Word of mouth, internet, reporters, publishers, etc., will be all over it. The evidence suggests that when a good product is in the marketplace, these things take care of themselves without one red cent being spent of marketing. Heck, I just saw an article in the print edition of the Wall Street Journal on adventure racing. Geocahing in National Geographic. Letterboxing in Time. Better products, or better marketing acumen? (We have seen the occasional orienteering article is lesser mainstream media, but it just doesn't take. In general, the seem to try it, and prefer the competition in the market). Product problem.
Contrast that to two years of evidence from orienteering. If Clark or someone else wants to do a "spreadsheet", take the ED marketing and travel expenses from the past two years, and see how many sponsorships, grants, starts, and memberships have been generated as a result of those expenditures. Then "grade" that performance. Talk "ROI" then. A much better exercise than looking for more blood from the volunteer turnip at the club level under present models, most of which are already at capacity at present. IMHO, the proposed plan is mostly more of the same, and will likely have similar results. $34K will be spent, in a non-sustainable way, even if successful in achieving the 2011 starts, membership, club, and A meet quotas.
Some progress on OUSA membership numbers may certainly be possibly by making them available for sale and renewal online and by marketing them to club members more effectively but I can't help thinking the root of the problem there is that the benefits of OUSA are not sufficiently compelling to most of the potential membership pool. Maybe they can be shown the error of their ways. Maybe the benefits need to be made more compelling.
This is exactly what I'm talking about (but, as a quick aside w.r.t. to electronic memberships, given the presumed paypal fee of 3.5%, the electronic initiative has to generate slightly more than 3.5% growth just to break even from a financial point of view, and this is a yearly recurring cost on top of it. Note that the quota is 10% growth (more since the 2010 quota was missed), so that is a material chunk. You need about 14% from a financial point of view to make the quota.
Anyway, Jon correctly implies that the membership may not be worth $35. That's the real problem -- a product problem. Offer people something worth $35, and they will buy it
The proposed solution even admits this in not being a marketing solution. Cold calling those for which market awareness and penetration already exists, Not proselytizing to the unwashed masses. These people may bite (and for the sake of making 2011 quota, lets hope they do), but even if they to, this is not a sustainable suggestion, given the size of that universe.
Fix the product instead. What do you get for a membership? Rankings, championship eligibility, and team eligibility. Not important to newbies or most rec consumers in the market. Voting rights and that sort of stuff doesn't count, as again, most consumers don't care. That leaves $35 for ONA. No offense, but ONA isn't worth $35. Make it worth $35, and then you're talking. Compare to SI at $48 for 56 issues (print and digital). Runner's World at $17 for 12 issues, and there is more content per issue. Not the same market? Put out something like that O magazine from Europe from a few years ago -- still not worth $35 in the consumer market (remember, not everyone is affluent, and $35 is material in the consumer market to many), but with some added benefits elsewhere, the product is on its way to being fixed.
Now, onto the real product problem, the product in the woods. I've identified a few of the competitive disadvantages of O in the market, and I'm glad to see others are hitting on a big one, and that is interval starts.
The negatives of this have already been hit on by other posters, but lets summarize: Waiting around to participate with nothing to do. Waiting around when done participating with nothing to do. Not being aware of the performance of your competition in real time. No or impaired social experience during and after the competition. Waiting around to even see if you have won! There's more, but I forget them. These competitive disadvantages are big deals, people. What other activity in this market has interval starts? All I can think of is golf, but even being in a foursome gives some remediation of these problems.
Will mass start score O's fix this? Maybe. At least people are finally starting to see it as a product problem and talk solutions in that domain rather than more $$$ marketing the same weak product (as 2 years of evidence have already shown how that has worked out). Certainly making it mass start trail runs will; there is plenty of evidence for that. The question is, how far will orienteering sell its soul to change the product to better compete in the market, or be content with the pure product? A question for those wiser than myself to ponder.
What are some other competitive disadvantages of the product in this market?
1) The A meet experience. The typical A meet experience is to drive or fly somewhere out of the consumer's geography (at great expense in this economy), participate for about 60-90 minutes a day (while waiting around a parking lot, field, or similar site with nothing to do before and after participation), then staying at a chain motel near an interstate exchange while watching chain motel TV and deciding which chain restaurant to eat at (obviously those in the social network may have more to do, but that is not the target market, and the newbies typically are not welcomed into the social network).
Consumers are being asked to spend weekend vacation money for this experience. Most consumers are unwilling to spend weekend vacation money, and not get a weekend vacation experience. Product problem. Fix the A meet experience so that consumers get weekend vacation value for weekend vacation dollars. Hold the meets at cool sites with plenty to do after the race, for example, and cut down on the wasted time at the venue. Again, remember that the target market is not as affluent as
those making these decisions and going to most A meets without
thinking about it, and if lucky, may have one weekend per quarter
(or less) that they can spend weekend vacation money. Is such
a consumer willing to spend it on the experience described above?
Moreover, as Tom Nolan (I believe), pointed out on board net, the newbie experience is intimidating on top of that, Want to make banners? Make something that helps the newbie get oriented at an A meet. Have someone welcome them, rather than the surly, overworked volunteer that was my first contact in the A meet world. Want to work on web sites, get rid of all that cryptic M45+/Red nonsense than the newbie sees. Compare registration for a running race with all that. Read Tom's message and understand what the newbies experience, and why they look at it, and
say "forget it". Is there a newbie FAQ on any registration? Is
there standardization of the event websites so newbies are not
confused? The problem with many orienteering people, including, unfortunately, many who make the decisions, is that they don't have the capacity to empathize with non-hardcore types, consumers in this market, newbies and prospective newbies, non-affluent consumers affected by the economy, and so forth.
2) The volunteer guilt trip drumbeat.
Once you've been to a few meets, and perhaps join a club, or club newsletter or forum, you are constantly bombarded by negative messages to volunteer. They are always "stick" based, never "carrot" based (eg, "volunteer, or meets will be canceled"; never "volunteer, and you race for free"). And this drumbeat goes on and on and on, a constant din in the backdrop of the experience.
Most consumers are not interested in this experience. They want to pay their money, enjoy the experience, and move on with their life. Like the experience of playing laser tag or mini golf. They may already have a job (which may be a hassle) or otherwise be working like a dog to make it in this economy, most likely already volunteer time and money (if they can afford to do so) to causes most neutral observers would consider more virtuous, many have school age children which also take alot of time (as an aside, ever notice how the large percentage of those banging this drum either a) don't have schoolage children, b) are retired, c) are affluent, d) all or some of the above (this doesn't describe your target market!)). This is the reality of the market, and the reality of the competing products in this market that don't have
this annoying cost.
I understand the amount of labor required to produce the product. It is a structural competitive disadvantage, and perhaps a fatal flaw, as lower-cost producers of competing product are cleaning clocks in this market. But, it still needs to be pointed out that the volunteer guilt drum experience is viewed as a cost by the market, and the product could be improved by eliminating it. As I've pointed out previously, My son's youth soccer league has eliminated this problem with a carrot approach, all volunteers get a full season of free soccer for their families, and this is plainly disclosed during volunteer recruitment
(compare to USOF, where some are compensated in a non-transparent
way, while others are guilted). They never have a problem with it. And it is not just about the money, its also about showing appreciation,
so the volunteer is warm and fuzzy as well. Perfect example of turning
lemons into lemonade in this market. I'm certain that $34K, or $200K over the past 2 years could go along way in this regard, but the orienteering people who make these decisions don't get it, as you "should want to sacrifice for orienteering". News flash: orienteering is no more virtuous than youth soccer. And you've got this competition on the volunteer front as well as the product front. Wake up and smell the economics.
3) In the woods experience.
At a championship a few years ago, supposedly the premier showcase for the sport, I spent 90 minutes or so running thru greenbriar. This is just one example of poor quality control. While the hardcore participants may enjoy this experience, I assure you that this does not have mass market (or even niche market) appeal. One experience like
this, and the newbies simply do not come back, and oldbies go do
something else less annoying. I'd go into work all scratched up, and
everyone would ask what happened? Why would you want to do that? Talk
about marketing. Well, the old adage that even bad publicity is good publicity simply doesn't apply here.
I've been run thru private property with angry landowners and angry dogs. No warnings, no quality control. Mishung controls. Mismapped features. Surly volunteers who unhelpfully offer -- "that's too bad, just the way it is". Mishung controls after spending a ton of money to go to an A meet. Ever consider giving a refund? At the very least, USOF should offer free entry to the next A meet. Ever follow up with newbies, especially after a bad meet?
But USOF doesn't think like a business. They don't feel quality control and putting out quality product and treating the consumer like a consumer is important enough to actually put some time and money into doing it. Yet they bemoan (since 1998 in my experience), why they have so few consumers. All they view the consumer as is a prospective volunteer. Last time I played mini golf, I wasn't viewed as a prospective volunteer, just another piece of meat, but as a prospective repeat consumer. Despite mini golf being more capital and labor intensive than orienteering, it was actually cheaper per hour played, and they offered a refund when quality wasn't up to standards.
It was recently posted on a club forum that the number of ranked runners had declined by 10% . The ranked runners are your best customers, ones that continue to buy enough product to make the ranking list. Any businessman worth his salt upon seeing a 10% decline in their recurring revenue base would instantly attempt to drill down to find the problem. But, as far as I know, it was just a statistic, that we "hope" (there's that word again) improves.
Recommendation on this entire point: Quality of the product matters, think like a business, and treat the consumer like someone you want repeat business from.
There's more, but I realise no one reads it, much less that it does any good, so I'll go away now. But I still believe that there is some value in recognizing that it is a product problem, not a marketing problem, that this $34K plan looks like good money after bad, and even if you don't agree on these major points (and I know you don't), my intent is still for someone to find some value in some of the minor points.
Finally, if I had the $34K to spend on the stated goal of increasing starts, I would spent it on offering financial incentives to volunteers to hold more races, and I would do so in an equitable and transparent way. Heck, I would have spent the previous $200K doing this (if not simply paying people minimum wage to start). So, other than looking at how to improve the product as stated above and by other posters, that is my response and recommendation.
Good luck, and HTH. This, hopefully, will be my final post, which is
improvement already :)
Good products market themselves. Word of mouth, internet, reporters, publishers, etc., will be all over it. The evidence suggests that when a good product is in the marketplace, these things take care of themselves without one red cent being spent of marketing. Heck, I just saw an article in the print edition of the Wall Street Journal on adventure racing. Geocahing in National Geographic. Letterboxing in Time. Better products, or better marketing acumen? (We have seen the occasional orienteering article is lesser mainstream media, but it just doesn't take. In general, the seem to try it, and prefer the competition in the market). Product problem.
Contrast that to two years of evidence from orienteering. If Clark or someone else wants to do a "spreadsheet", take the ED marketing and travel expenses from the past two years, and see how many sponsorships, grants, starts, and memberships have been generated as a result of those expenditures. Then "grade" that performance. Talk "ROI" then. A much better exercise than looking for more blood from the volunteer turnip at the club level under present models, most of which are already at capacity at present. IMHO, the proposed plan is mostly more of the same, and will likely have similar results. $34K will be spent, in a non-sustainable way, even if successful in achieving the 2011 starts, membership, club, and A meet quotas.
Some progress on OUSA membership numbers may certainly be possibly by making them available for sale and renewal online and by marketing them to club members more effectively but I can't help thinking the root of the problem there is that the benefits of OUSA are not sufficiently compelling to most of the potential membership pool. Maybe they can be shown the error of their ways. Maybe the benefits need to be made more compelling.
This is exactly what I'm talking about (but, as a quick aside w.r.t. to electronic memberships, given the presumed paypal fee of 3.5%, the electronic initiative has to generate slightly more than 3.5% growth just to break even from a financial point of view, and this is a yearly recurring cost on top of it. Note that the quota is 10% growth (more since the 2010 quota was missed), so that is a material chunk. You need about 14% from a financial point of view to make the quota.
Anyway, Jon correctly implies that the membership may not be worth $35. That's the real problem -- a product problem. Offer people something worth $35, and they will buy it
The proposed solution even admits this in not being a marketing solution. Cold calling those for which market awareness and penetration already exists, Not proselytizing to the unwashed masses. These people may bite (and for the sake of making 2011 quota, lets hope they do), but even if they to, this is not a sustainable suggestion, given the size of that universe.
Fix the product instead. What do you get for a membership? Rankings, championship eligibility, and team eligibility. Not important to newbies or most rec consumers in the market. Voting rights and that sort of stuff doesn't count, as again, most consumers don't care. That leaves $35 for ONA. No offense, but ONA isn't worth $35. Make it worth $35, and then you're talking. Compare to SI at $48 for 56 issues (print and digital). Runner's World at $17 for 12 issues, and there is more content per issue. Not the same market? Put out something like that O magazine from Europe from a few years ago -- still not worth $35 in the consumer market (remember, not everyone is affluent, and $35 is material in the consumer market to many), but with some added benefits elsewhere, the product is on its way to being fixed.
Now, onto the real product problem, the product in the woods. I've identified a few of the competitive disadvantages of O in the market, and I'm glad to see others are hitting on a big one, and that is interval starts.
The negatives of this have already been hit on by other posters, but lets summarize: Waiting around to participate with nothing to do. Waiting around when done participating with nothing to do. Not being aware of the performance of your competition in real time. No or impaired social experience during and after the competition. Waiting around to even see if you have won! There's more, but I forget them. These competitive disadvantages are big deals, people. What other activity in this market has interval starts? All I can think of is golf, but even being in a foursome gives some remediation of these problems.
Will mass start score O's fix this? Maybe. At least people are finally starting to see it as a product problem and talk solutions in that domain rather than more $$$ marketing the same weak product (as 2 years of evidence have already shown how that has worked out). Certainly making it mass start trail runs will; there is plenty of evidence for that. The question is, how far will orienteering sell its soul to change the product to better compete in the market, or be content with the pure product? A question for those wiser than myself to ponder.
What are some other competitive disadvantages of the product in this market?
1) The A meet experience. The typical A meet experience is to drive or fly somewhere out of the consumer's geography (at great expense in this economy), participate for about 60-90 minutes a day (while waiting around a parking lot, field, or similar site with nothing to do before and after participation), then staying at a chain motel near an interstate exchange while watching chain motel TV and deciding which chain restaurant to eat at (obviously those in the social network may have more to do, but that is not the target market, and the newbies typically are not welcomed into the social network).
Consumers are being asked to spend weekend vacation money for this experience. Most consumers are unwilling to spend weekend vacation money, and not get a weekend vacation experience. Product problem. Fix the A meet experience so that consumers get weekend vacation value for weekend vacation dollars. Hold the meets at cool sites with plenty to do after the race, for example, and cut down on the wasted time at the venue. Again, remember that the target market is not as affluent as
those making these decisions and going to most A meets without
thinking about it, and if lucky, may have one weekend per quarter
(or less) that they can spend weekend vacation money. Is such
a consumer willing to spend it on the experience described above?
Moreover, as Tom Nolan (I believe), pointed out on board net, the newbie experience is intimidating on top of that, Want to make banners? Make something that helps the newbie get oriented at an A meet. Have someone welcome them, rather than the surly, overworked volunteer that was my first contact in the A meet world. Want to work on web sites, get rid of all that cryptic M45+/Red nonsense than the newbie sees. Compare registration for a running race with all that. Read Tom's message and understand what the newbies experience, and why they look at it, and
say "forget it". Is there a newbie FAQ on any registration? Is
there standardization of the event websites so newbies are not
confused? The problem with many orienteering people, including, unfortunately, many who make the decisions, is that they don't have the capacity to empathize with non-hardcore types, consumers in this market, newbies and prospective newbies, non-affluent consumers affected by the economy, and so forth.
2) The volunteer guilt trip drumbeat.
Once you've been to a few meets, and perhaps join a club, or club newsletter or forum, you are constantly bombarded by negative messages to volunteer. They are always "stick" based, never "carrot" based (eg, "volunteer, or meets will be canceled"; never "volunteer, and you race for free"). And this drumbeat goes on and on and on, a constant din in the backdrop of the experience.
Most consumers are not interested in this experience. They want to pay their money, enjoy the experience, and move on with their life. Like the experience of playing laser tag or mini golf. They may already have a job (which may be a hassle) or otherwise be working like a dog to make it in this economy, most likely already volunteer time and money (if they can afford to do so) to causes most neutral observers would consider more virtuous, many have school age children which also take alot of time (as an aside, ever notice how the large percentage of those banging this drum either a) don't have schoolage children, b) are retired, c) are affluent, d) all or some of the above (this doesn't describe your target market!)). This is the reality of the market, and the reality of the competing products in this market that don't have
this annoying cost.
I understand the amount of labor required to produce the product. It is a structural competitive disadvantage, and perhaps a fatal flaw, as lower-cost producers of competing product are cleaning clocks in this market. But, it still needs to be pointed out that the volunteer guilt drum experience is viewed as a cost by the market, and the product could be improved by eliminating it. As I've pointed out previously, My son's youth soccer league has eliminated this problem with a carrot approach, all volunteers get a full season of free soccer for their families, and this is plainly disclosed during volunteer recruitment
(compare to USOF, where some are compensated in a non-transparent
way, while others are guilted). They never have a problem with it. And it is not just about the money, its also about showing appreciation,
so the volunteer is warm and fuzzy as well. Perfect example of turning
lemons into lemonade in this market. I'm certain that $34K, or $200K over the past 2 years could go along way in this regard, but the orienteering people who make these decisions don't get it, as you "should want to sacrifice for orienteering". News flash: orienteering is no more virtuous than youth soccer. And you've got this competition on the volunteer front as well as the product front. Wake up and smell the economics.
3) In the woods experience.
At a championship a few years ago, supposedly the premier showcase for the sport, I spent 90 minutes or so running thru greenbriar. This is just one example of poor quality control. While the hardcore participants may enjoy this experience, I assure you that this does not have mass market (or even niche market) appeal. One experience like
this, and the newbies simply do not come back, and oldbies go do
something else less annoying. I'd go into work all scratched up, and
everyone would ask what happened? Why would you want to do that? Talk
about marketing. Well, the old adage that even bad publicity is good publicity simply doesn't apply here.
I've been run thru private property with angry landowners and angry dogs. No warnings, no quality control. Mishung controls. Mismapped features. Surly volunteers who unhelpfully offer -- "that's too bad, just the way it is". Mishung controls after spending a ton of money to go to an A meet. Ever consider giving a refund? At the very least, USOF should offer free entry to the next A meet. Ever follow up with newbies, especially after a bad meet?
But USOF doesn't think like a business. They don't feel quality control and putting out quality product and treating the consumer like a consumer is important enough to actually put some time and money into doing it. Yet they bemoan (since 1998 in my experience), why they have so few consumers. All they view the consumer as is a prospective volunteer. Last time I played mini golf, I wasn't viewed as a prospective volunteer, just another piece of meat, but as a prospective repeat consumer. Despite mini golf being more capital and labor intensive than orienteering, it was actually cheaper per hour played, and they offered a refund when quality wasn't up to standards.
It was recently posted on a club forum that the number of ranked runners had declined by 10% . The ranked runners are your best customers, ones that continue to buy enough product to make the ranking list. Any businessman worth his salt upon seeing a 10% decline in their recurring revenue base would instantly attempt to drill down to find the problem. But, as far as I know, it was just a statistic, that we "hope" (there's that word again) improves.
Recommendation on this entire point: Quality of the product matters, think like a business, and treat the consumer like someone you want repeat business from.
There's more, but I realise no one reads it, much less that it does any good, so I'll go away now. But I still believe that there is some value in recognizing that it is a product problem, not a marketing problem, that this $34K plan looks like good money after bad, and even if you don't agree on these major points (and I know you don't), my intent is still for someone to find some value in some of the minor points.
Finally, if I had the $34K to spend on the stated goal of increasing starts, I would spent it on offering financial incentives to volunteers to hold more races, and I would do so in an equitable and transparent way. Heck, I would have spent the previous $200K doing this (if not simply paying people minimum wage to start). So, other than looking at how to improve the product as stated above and by other posters, that is my response and recommendation.
Good luck, and HTH. This, hopefully, will be my final post, which is
improvement already :)
May 16, 2011 1:17 PM
#
feet:
I almost entirely agree with Randy, which is a novel experience. There is no marketing problem; there is a product problem. The only ways to solve the product problem are (a) get really lucky in the quality and motivation of your volunteers (which I think is DVOA's secret) or (b) give someone a financial incentive to hold better-attended O-like events. The few properly-flourishing O events in North America are those (GHO, MerGeo, GetLost!!) where the organizer takes the competitor experience seriously because they have some financial incentive to do so - it's a job. When such an organization emerges in the northeast, orienteering will be the better for it. Hopefully it won't take too long, because we can't wait that long.
May 16, 2011 2:10 PM
#
If an NCO emerges in the Northeast, our best wishes to it. We hope that it doesn't have to endure sneering, derogatory remarks, and dropped e-mails from esteemed orienteering clubs like Get Lost!! did in response to every single proposal of cooperation we have so far extended.
May 16, 2011 3:41 PM
#
pi:
Something not mentioned in this thread yet, something that can be easily done at larger A-meets, is to put a little bit of effort into creating an arena experience!
North American orienteering simply does not seem to get this concept. We have made an effort to highlight this approach in the last couple of years to try to get others to take it up. Did you come to NAOCs and/or COCs last year? Did you notice that people were hanging around in great excitement to follow the action? Did you notice the great atmosphere in the arena? Do you think any newbies at these events would think it was boring and lame and intimidating?
All you need to do is plan courses with some thought put into possible spectator controls and/or start in the arena, seed the best elites to start last and find someone who can build excitement with the announcing.
Maybe even offer something to eat and drink for your customers while they are enjoying your show?
Come on guys, make it happen!
North American orienteering simply does not seem to get this concept. We have made an effort to highlight this approach in the last couple of years to try to get others to take it up. Did you come to NAOCs and/or COCs last year? Did you notice that people were hanging around in great excitement to follow the action? Did you notice the great atmosphere in the arena? Do you think any newbies at these events would think it was boring and lame and intimidating?
All you need to do is plan courses with some thought put into possible spectator controls and/or start in the arena, seed the best elites to start last and find someone who can build excitement with the announcing.
Maybe even offer something to eat and drink for your customers while they are enjoying your show?
Come on guys, make it happen!
May 16, 2011 5:10 PM
#
I also agree with Randy, except I would soften the assertion that it is just a product, and not a marketing problem. If we did some comparative statics, we might be able to say that. I'm just not sure we've ever seen effective marketing for orienteering, so how can we say it doesn't work?
But, as any good MBA will tell you, product is a marketing issue.
But, as any good MBA will tell you, product is a marketing issue.
May 16, 2011 5:26 PM
#
feet:
@pi: your point is a symptom of the problem. It's obvious how to do better (you suggest how). But the point is that current orienteers do not care about that (you can tell - they still show up to orienteering events anyway), do not have talents in organizing that, and have no incentives to do so. Exhorting them to change is not going to work. Or at least, it hasn't yet, and it seems overly optimistic to assume that it's just about to start working.
May 16, 2011 5:51 PM
#
pi:
It might be true that it's not making a huge difference to the current core (though they certainly enjoyed the experience), but it's that group that's just outside the core that it can have an important influence on. The Canadian High Performance Program has received much increased interest from the juniors/young seniors group in the last couple of years. We had several athletes come back to the program who seemed to be lost to orienteering. I know that a big part of the reason was the arena effort, because they told me so. "Wow, that was soo cool. I did not think an orienteering race could be so exciting. I want to be part of this".
I'm a strong believer that this type of effort is indeed (at least part of) a solution. I have seen that it has an effect. I want to spread the message that it's not particularly hard to do. Call it "exhort" if you want.
I'm a strong believer that this type of effort is indeed (at least part of) a solution. I have seen that it has an effect. I want to spread the message that it's not particularly hard to do. Call it "exhort" if you want.
May 16, 2011 5:52 PM
#
RE arena production: I think it will slowly spread, Vancouver did a good job of it this summer as did Ottawa and then GHO at the Ontario Champs in the fall after experience the above mentioned summer meets. I've heard rumors about planning for a similar arena experience at the 2012 North Americans and I know Ottawa will try and repeat the same thing when we host the Ontario Champs this fall on the same maps as at the COCs.
I don't think we can count on the same old hands changing their ways but I hope that as new forward looking types start coming out to participate in these new customer friendly meets we will see more new officials starting to set courses with arena atmosphere in mind.
I don't think we can count on the same old hands changing their ways but I hope that as new forward looking types start coming out to participate in these new customer friendly meets we will see more new officials starting to set courses with arena atmosphere in mind.
May 16, 2011 6:49 PM
#
Seattle is coming up...
There is one. It's called Meridian Geographics and it's not a club. Thanks to the job MerGeo does in marketing map activities, a lot of the newcomers become Cascade's regulars.
I don't have any numbers to back this up, but it doesn't feel like "a lot" when I speak to newcomers (and I frequently do, as my role as a volunteer beginner instructor). I also don't know exactly what all marketing MerGeo does, but it seems to me that it could be better. I think they have the most marketable orienteering-related product around, but it seems like nobody knows about it. (And then RoadRunner Sports comes in with a splash, with essentially the same product.)
Cascade OC is Orienteering USA's largest club source of income in 2010
Shouldn't a large part of this be attributed to hosting the US Champs and WIOL?
Yes. Our Winter Series (includes WIOL) is huge, as we're pretty much hosting 8 one-day A-Meets, reaching into the 300-350 attendance range. While a healthy number of people also participate in MerGeo events, I don't know how many are here because of MerGeo events. (The US Champs in 2010 was huge, so it'll be interesting to see where the 2011 numbers come in, since we're taking a year off from hosting an A-Meet.)
Also, this is from Glen's document:
Work with Club and Third Party Operator to hold one more A-meet in Q4
Target COC and Meridian Geographics (Eric Bone), or other third party operator to host event on existing map. (No A-meets this year in Pacific Northwest).
This isn't going to happen in 2011 in Seattle. We've got most of our local talent geared up for the 2012 event, so to host another event before that just isn't feasible. Plus, we have geographical/climate/access restrictions on our A-meet quality maps in the winter. If you're going to target PNW as a must-have for the A-meet schedule, consider the planned two-day events in Idaho and Oregon later in the summer.
If there's a club in North America that has cracked this nut and is enormously outperforming what one would expect in the way of membership recruitment and retention based on its circumstances.
And from my view in Seattle, I think the answer is GHO. While I've never been to any of their events, they seem to "get it". Just look at how successful the Raid series is, and the ARK. They just had 1100 juniors running in one recent race. We had 1300 junior starts last season, and that was through eight events.
There is one. It's called Meridian Geographics and it's not a club. Thanks to the job MerGeo does in marketing map activities, a lot of the newcomers become Cascade's regulars.
I don't have any numbers to back this up, but it doesn't feel like "a lot" when I speak to newcomers (and I frequently do, as my role as a volunteer beginner instructor). I also don't know exactly what all marketing MerGeo does, but it seems to me that it could be better. I think they have the most marketable orienteering-related product around, but it seems like nobody knows about it. (And then RoadRunner Sports comes in with a splash, with essentially the same product.)
Cascade OC is Orienteering USA's largest club source of income in 2010
Shouldn't a large part of this be attributed to hosting the US Champs and WIOL?
Yes. Our Winter Series (includes WIOL) is huge, as we're pretty much hosting 8 one-day A-Meets, reaching into the 300-350 attendance range. While a healthy number of people also participate in MerGeo events, I don't know how many are here because of MerGeo events. (The US Champs in 2010 was huge, so it'll be interesting to see where the 2011 numbers come in, since we're taking a year off from hosting an A-Meet.)
Also, this is from Glen's document:
Work with Club and Third Party Operator to hold one more A-meet in Q4
Target COC and Meridian Geographics (Eric Bone), or other third party operator to host event on existing map. (No A-meets this year in Pacific Northwest).
This isn't going to happen in 2011 in Seattle. We've got most of our local talent geared up for the 2012 event, so to host another event before that just isn't feasible. Plus, we have geographical/climate/access restrictions on our A-meet quality maps in the winter. If you're going to target PNW as a must-have for the A-meet schedule, consider the planned two-day events in Idaho and Oregon later in the summer.
If there's a club in North America that has cracked this nut and is enormously outperforming what one would expect in the way of membership recruitment and retention based on its circumstances.
And from my view in Seattle, I think the answer is GHO. While I've never been to any of their events, they seem to "get it". Just look at how successful the Raid series is, and the ARK. They just had 1100 juniors running in one recent race. We had 1300 junior starts last season, and that was through eight events.
May 16, 2011 7:13 PM
#
Arena = a great way to improve the existing product. I love running through one, I love watching them, and I'll continue to work to include them in any event I'm organizing.
But I think there needs to be some form of our product that is more accessible to the rest of the population.
When I look at the other organized sports that I play, they all have other "popular" formats that make them more accessible to people.
Do you want to play volleyball, but you don't like diving on a hard surface? No worries, they play on the beach!
Do you want to play basketball, but you don't want to be on a five-man team? No worries, they have those outdoor "hoopsfest" 3-on-3 weekend tourneys!
Do you want to play baseball, but you're now older and it's too fast for you? No worries, play slow-pitch softball!
For the competitive types (high school, college, pros), they play indoor volleyball, traditional basketball, and baseball. But for the "regular" folks, I'd guess that there are more beach volleyball players than indoor, and more softball players than baseball.
But I think there needs to be some form of our product that is more accessible to the rest of the population.
When I look at the other organized sports that I play, they all have other "popular" formats that make them more accessible to people.
Do you want to play volleyball, but you don't like diving on a hard surface? No worries, they play on the beach!
Do you want to play basketball, but you don't want to be on a five-man team? No worries, they have those outdoor "hoopsfest" 3-on-3 weekend tourneys!
Do you want to play baseball, but you're now older and it's too fast for you? No worries, play slow-pitch softball!
For the competitive types (high school, college, pros), they play indoor volleyball, traditional basketball, and baseball. But for the "regular" folks, I'd guess that there are more beach volleyball players than indoor, and more softball players than baseball.
May 16, 2011 7:58 PM
#
Patrick, I don't disagree but can you find us an example from individual aerobic sports? The difference is in the way they are scaled back to social activities / training activities depending on your level no? It seems to me that people get together with friends to go for a bike ride or a run or cross country skiing at a leisurely pace, enjoy the outdoors, and spend time with friends.
As it stands now orienteering doesn't offer that. (As a side note it's something adventure runs / races are much better at offering...) I am fairly certain that this is one of our biggest hurdles to overcome. And I think that one of the things we can do to start overcoming it is permanent courses as GHO has already started doing.
As it stands now orienteering doesn't offer that. (As a side note it's something adventure runs / races are much better at offering...) I am fairly certain that this is one of our biggest hurdles to overcome. And I think that one of the things we can do to start overcoming it is permanent courses as GHO has already started doing.
May 16, 2011 8:49 PM
#
But, we do have Trail-O. What else could be needed?
and its that attitude that has the sport slowly declining :) (meant in jest of not)
and its that attitude that has the sport slowly declining :) (meant in jest of not)
May 16, 2011 8:56 PM
#
derogatory remarks, and dropped e-mails
this was East Coast-specific to a couple of entities. Sorry anyone from the other coast—we have had a very good relationship with BAOC and hope for lots more productive and mutually beneficial projects with it and other clubs!
this was East Coast-specific to a couple of entities. Sorry anyone from the other coast—we have had a very good relationship with BAOC and hope for lots more productive and mutually beneficial projects with it and other clubs!
May 16, 2011 9:48 PM
#
There's no reason for people to be assholes, but it is valid to complain about an activity taking a name (trail orienteering) that could be used for something that is actually orienteering and not just a map reading activity.
Back on topic, I just realized that the Tucson club has been slowly adding events using the easy-to-organize and beginner-friendly mass start score-o (or score-o-ish) format that has been suggested in this thread. I'm no fan of score-o (understatement) in place of pt-to-pt courses for our main monthly events, but these simple, mass start, score events in urban locations have been a great way to get runners to try the sport. Heartily recommend.
Back on topic, I just realized that the Tucson club has been slowly adding events using the easy-to-organize and beginner-friendly mass start score-o (or score-o-ish) format that has been suggested in this thread. I'm no fan of score-o (understatement) in place of pt-to-pt courses for our main monthly events, but these simple, mass start, score events in urban locations have been a great way to get runners to try the sport. Heartily recommend.
May 16, 2011 10:51 PM
#
So now he is childish and an asshole? Just for posting a funny remark? Please. Highlighting it was a mistake. Now this risks turning into another the-mistake-that-is-trailo-bashing thread, while it was being very thought-provoking.
May 16, 2011 10:56 PM
#
I hereby proclaim this to be a no trail-o bashing thread.
And anyone who bashes, beware! I'll start talking about logos again... ;-)
And anyone who bashes, beware! I'll start talking about logos again... ;-)
May 16, 2011 11:15 PM
#
Yeah, let's stop with the trail-o talk. This thread was interesting!
May 16, 2011 11:18 PM
#
This notion of "product" strikes a chord with me. Or rather, product appeal in relation to production cost. Clearly an enterprise needs to make a product that people want, within the resources available. Many orienteers fail to recognise that the traditional experience that they so love does NOT appeal to many people, never will in spite of good arena design etc, and it is expensive to provide. We are a tiny niche. Get real.
What to do though? (Assuming we have "missionary" ambitions.) I think (I'm not a marketer) that we need to think of SEVERAL products. And seek understanding from the current membership that theirs isn't the only orienteering product. The link is navigation with a map. All forms are equally valuable, a start is a start is a start. Each one consists of a person reading a map. Even being in a group with a person reading a map is a start.
1. Traditional individual orienteering, competition structures, people who train and prepare for orienteering, that is a small part of a tiny sport.
2. Traditional individual orienteering for most club orienteers, they might go to the XYZ championship but they don't PREPARE for it, orienteering fits into many other things in their lives. Another part of a tiny sport.
3. Anything else with a map. Huge potential. Released from the shackles of rules and location it can be tailored to what turns people on. Close to home is a given. Taking part in groups. Score format has social benefits and also production economies. Various twists serve to bring to the market's notice, because the participants DO NOT BELONG TO AN ORIENTEERING CLUB. They are typically adventurous people and in their lives they do lots of other stuff. They may be type 1's in another sport for example. But a start is a start is a start. And these ones are cheaper to provide.
I follow with great interest the private enterprise events in the Pacific Northwest. And also the club model at GHO. Whatever works. We run an urban rogaine where you can use public transport, its under the club umbrella with (lowly) paid staff. It gets 500 participants, but takes about the same workload as a traditional event that gets 100.
Action points? I think seeking understanding of the wider scene from club members. Many type 2's don't even understand type 1 (hence may not join the national body, where this is optional). Let alone the significance of type 3.
Ahhh. Now I must put my entry in for that long weekend A-meet 700km away...
What to do though? (Assuming we have "missionary" ambitions.) I think (I'm not a marketer) that we need to think of SEVERAL products. And seek understanding from the current membership that theirs isn't the only orienteering product. The link is navigation with a map. All forms are equally valuable, a start is a start is a start. Each one consists of a person reading a map. Even being in a group with a person reading a map is a start.
1. Traditional individual orienteering, competition structures, people who train and prepare for orienteering, that is a small part of a tiny sport.
2. Traditional individual orienteering for most club orienteers, they might go to the XYZ championship but they don't PREPARE for it, orienteering fits into many other things in their lives. Another part of a tiny sport.
3. Anything else with a map. Huge potential. Released from the shackles of rules and location it can be tailored to what turns people on. Close to home is a given. Taking part in groups. Score format has social benefits and also production economies. Various twists serve to bring to the market's notice, because the participants DO NOT BELONG TO AN ORIENTEERING CLUB. They are typically adventurous people and in their lives they do lots of other stuff. They may be type 1's in another sport for example. But a start is a start is a start. And these ones are cheaper to provide.
I follow with great interest the private enterprise events in the Pacific Northwest. And also the club model at GHO. Whatever works. We run an urban rogaine where you can use public transport, its under the club umbrella with (lowly) paid staff. It gets 500 participants, but takes about the same workload as a traditional event that gets 100.
Action points? I think seeking understanding of the wider scene from club members. Many type 2's don't even understand type 1 (hence may not join the national body, where this is optional). Let alone the significance of type 3.
Ahhh. Now I must put my entry in for that long weekend A-meet 700km away...
May 16, 2011 11:19 PM
#
Ok, back on topic...
Tucson is doing more score-o's. Cascade OC just committed to a series of score-o's for later this summer (incidentally, before we found out about the whole Thursday Adventure Run thing). Rochester does a series of score-o's.
Other clubs are doing them, too, I'm sure. Easy to organize, easy to produce, more social, yadda, yadda yadda.
Let's get O-USA on board to help this become a national score-o series, and re-brand them as Adventure Runs (before the running stores take them all from us). They'd be unsanctioned local events, on whatever maps, wherever you want.
Each local club or NCO can advertise that they are part of this bigger, national thing, and O-USA can start promoting a national schedule of super-fun, entry-level events.
Tucson is doing more score-o's. Cascade OC just committed to a series of score-o's for later this summer (incidentally, before we found out about the whole Thursday Adventure Run thing). Rochester does a series of score-o's.
Other clubs are doing them, too, I'm sure. Easy to organize, easy to produce, more social, yadda, yadda yadda.
Let's get O-USA on board to help this become a national score-o series, and re-brand them as Adventure Runs (before the running stores take them all from us). They'd be unsanctioned local events, on whatever maps, wherever you want.
Each local club or NCO can advertise that they are part of this bigger, national thing, and O-USA can start promoting a national schedule of super-fun, entry-level events.
May 16, 2011 11:32 PM
#
Speaking about rebranding, A-meet -> US Cup? Or a NE coalition organise a NE Cup - just use whatever A-meets exist and turn it into a league type thing, scores from best eight(?) A-meet results count?
May 16, 2011 11:36 PM
#
+1 ndobbs
I had a parenthetical in my last post that mentioned rebranding A-Meets to US Cups, but I wanted to stay on topic, so I removed it. ;-)
I had a parenthetical in my last post that mentioned rebranding A-Meets to US Cups, but I wanted to stay on topic, so I removed it. ;-)
May 16, 2011 11:56 PM
#
What I would love to see is for the national body compile WELL DESIGNED guidelines things like:
Alternative and more effective beginner incorporation pathways
Naturally understandable course structures (goodby color codes, I hope)
Competition structures that legitimize intermediate skill levels. (Create pathway to growth)
Creating events with off-the-shelf map products.
Organizing an event arena show.
Generate a friendly and social meet environment.
Effectively maintain communication with past participants.
Promotional tools and advertising.
Creating high profile annual events to market.
These are the problems that most clubs are struggling with, and it's largely a symptom of neglect from above. O-USA does not focus on these aspects, which makes them implicitly less important than the things O-USA does focus on. This trickles down to pervade the entire orienteering culture. If O-USA says the first priority to start a club is an ISOM map drafted with OCAD, that's what new clubs will focus on, for better or worse. I don't see many non-orienteers deciding to break into the sport and start a club. But if O-USA says the first step to making a healthy orienteering program is communication system, volunteer recruitment plan, and good social activities, and teaches how to set up fun events with bare bones equipment? Might see a different result.
What scares me is that a group of people with good intentions develop guidelines for these things, and the current, somewhat dysfunctional state of gets encoded as 'the law'.
Alternative and more effective beginner incorporation pathways
Naturally understandable course structures (goodby color codes, I hope)
Competition structures that legitimize intermediate skill levels. (Create pathway to growth)
Creating events with off-the-shelf map products.
Organizing an event arena show.
Generate a friendly and social meet environment.
Effectively maintain communication with past participants.
Promotional tools and advertising.
Creating high profile annual events to market.
These are the problems that most clubs are struggling with, and it's largely a symptom of neglect from above. O-USA does not focus on these aspects, which makes them implicitly less important than the things O-USA does focus on. This trickles down to pervade the entire orienteering culture. If O-USA says the first priority to start a club is an ISOM map drafted with OCAD, that's what new clubs will focus on, for better or worse. I don't see many non-orienteers deciding to break into the sport and start a club. But if O-USA says the first step to making a healthy orienteering program is communication system, volunteer recruitment plan, and good social activities, and teaches how to set up fun events with bare bones equipment? Might see a different result.
What scares me is that a group of people with good intentions develop guidelines for these things, and the current, somewhat dysfunctional state of gets encoded as 'the law'.
May 17, 2011 12:11 AM
#
If O-USA says the first priority to start a club is
Right now it says exactly what your priorities should be. There is indeed a lot about maps. But on the bottom of the list, there is something non-negotiable, and it is 501(c). I'd say it is the primary reason that
I don't see many non-orienteers deciding to break into the sport and start a club.
Now tax-exempt and member-service are different things. Requiring an organization to be tax-exempt does not automatically bind it to the failed member-service model; there are plenty of tax-exempt organizations that do an awesome job serving the public. But if a bunch of us got together thinking how we can have some fun with the maps, and get a few others into it while we're at it, and it turns out a less expensive way for that is to become an Orienteering USA member club, because they have this spectacular insurance deal, and then we read down the list, and it says we have to file a bunch of paperwork with the IRS first?
Hm.
That's not how they do it in track and field, nor in adventure racing.
Right now it says exactly what your priorities should be. There is indeed a lot about maps. But on the bottom of the list, there is something non-negotiable, and it is 501(c). I'd say it is the primary reason that
I don't see many non-orienteers deciding to break into the sport and start a club.
Now tax-exempt and member-service are different things. Requiring an organization to be tax-exempt does not automatically bind it to the failed member-service model; there are plenty of tax-exempt organizations that do an awesome job serving the public. But if a bunch of us got together thinking how we can have some fun with the maps, and get a few others into it while we're at it, and it turns out a less expensive way for that is to become an Orienteering USA member club, because they have this spectacular insurance deal, and then we read down the list, and it says we have to file a bunch of paperwork with the IRS first?
Hm.
That's not how they do it in track and field, nor in adventure racing.
May 17, 2011 1:00 AM
#
If we are talking equal footing, then NCOs should have access to map loans (maybe not at the zero percent rate, but some level of access), and more or less equal conditions of sanctioning. On the flip side, both clubs and NCOs should apply for grants that are made available by Orienteering USA in order to further its objectives.
May 17, 2011 2:16 AM
#
The RRCA is an interesting model for OUSA. It is a 501c3 nonprofit, "founded on the all-volunteer, nonprofit running club and running event model, and this business model continues to represent the majority of the RRCA membership, today".
As of Dec. 2010, it had: 1,267 memberships, composed of 694 non-profit clubs, 263 non-profit events, 169 training programs, and 165 event directors. For-profit companies appear to be 5% or less of their members.
So while 80% of it's clubs/affiliates are nonprofit clubs, since it started allowing for-profit companies (as of 2005, I believe), the for-profit sector has been growing. And there appears to be no problem for RRCA to maintain it's nonprofit status, and for it's nonprofit clubs to retain their nonprofit status under the RRCA group exemption from the IRS, while including for-profits (both specific single events as well as race companies running multiple events). Membership information is here.
It's not all hunky-dory, of course. Reading RRCA Board minutes implies that some (nonprofit) RRCA clubs are having conflicts with for-profit RRCA-member companies hosting races of the same distance in the same areas on the same days, for example.
But overall the RRCA seems to accommodate for-profit companies quite well, offering them insurance and other benefits, and doing so in a manner that does not jeopardize RRCA's nonprofit status.
As of Dec. 2010, it had: 1,267 memberships, composed of 694 non-profit clubs, 263 non-profit events, 169 training programs, and 165 event directors. For-profit companies appear to be 5% or less of their members.
So while 80% of it's clubs/affiliates are nonprofit clubs, since it started allowing for-profit companies (as of 2005, I believe), the for-profit sector has been growing. And there appears to be no problem for RRCA to maintain it's nonprofit status, and for it's nonprofit clubs to retain their nonprofit status under the RRCA group exemption from the IRS, while including for-profits (both specific single events as well as race companies running multiple events). Membership information is here.
It's not all hunky-dory, of course. Reading RRCA Board minutes implies that some (nonprofit) RRCA clubs are having conflicts with for-profit RRCA-member companies hosting races of the same distance in the same areas on the same days, for example.
But overall the RRCA seems to accommodate for-profit companies quite well, offering them insurance and other benefits, and doing so in a manner that does not jeopardize RRCA's nonprofit status.
May 17, 2011 3:30 AM
#
Sanctioning should be able to handle any date/region conflict issues, just as they do now with the chartered clubs.
May 17, 2011 4:28 AM
#
Dan wrote...
it's not a zero sum game. People volunteer for and support the part of the sport they are most passionate about. People who might volunteer for a MerGeo Street Scramble are likely not to be the same people who are interested in supporting more traditional orienteering.
That's exactly what I find round here (*). Urban rogaines and MTBO attract people who don't identify with orienteering and in the main don't join up. But they do see that the events don't happen without planning, and when a call goes out on the email list (that's how we keep in touch) they put their hands up. Is this clear: most of these planners are not members of the orienteering club. Many of them regard orienteering as a rather wacky pursuit (because of the detail of the maps and the subtle control siting). But they plan. Given the choice, they will plan a score event.
The role of the club is (a) legal protection (b) maintenance of a topographic style of mapping for the entire urban area and printing the bit required (c) a surreptitious form of quality control via the above.
* "Round here" is code for "I recognise that the legal, sporting, banking, population, everything environment differs widely and what may work here won't work there. The word "rogaine" is quite cool for example. Much better than "orienteering", round hair.
it's not a zero sum game. People volunteer for and support the part of the sport they are most passionate about. People who might volunteer for a MerGeo Street Scramble are likely not to be the same people who are interested in supporting more traditional orienteering.
That's exactly what I find round here (*). Urban rogaines and MTBO attract people who don't identify with orienteering and in the main don't join up. But they do see that the events don't happen without planning, and when a call goes out on the email list (that's how we keep in touch) they put their hands up. Is this clear: most of these planners are not members of the orienteering club. Many of them regard orienteering as a rather wacky pursuit (because of the detail of the maps and the subtle control siting). But they plan. Given the choice, they will plan a score event.
The role of the club is (a) legal protection (b) maintenance of a topographic style of mapping for the entire urban area and printing the bit required (c) a surreptitious form of quality control via the above.
* "Round here" is code for "I recognise that the legal, sporting, banking, population, everything environment differs widely and what may work here won't work there. The word "rogaine" is quite cool for example. Much better than "orienteering", round hair.
May 17, 2011 12:17 PM
#
GuyO:
A relevant O-experience in Taiwan...
One weekday afternoon, at a "sports park" in Taipei (actually New Taipei City), I witnessed the introduction of orienteering to a large group of 4th graders by professional O-instructors. The sequence of exercises went as follows:
1) A star-course (?) set in a flat, open field, using subsets of several controls for a seemingly endless combination of point-to-point courses (though only 12 were used). The map was, essentially, a white sheet of paper showing all controls, boundaries (ribbons on two sides, plus cormer markers), start and finish; as with terrain maps, courses were overlaid. The "races" were 12-person mass starts. Timing was informal, and mostly to keep things moving. The exercise reminded me of the "sports labyrinth" activity at the O in the Oaks/IS/IC -- but without the actual labyrinth.
2) Smaller-group instructions in map symbols, using the ISSOM map of the park, while walking from the first activity to the start (and finish) of the next one.
3) Finally, a 50-minute. mass-start, score-O using the sports park map (I don't think controls had point values, but I could be wrong); timing was informal, and mostly for safety reasons.
Notable to me, was the fact that both course exercises were individual -- not team -- races. There was no "buddy system" like with Scouts, and everybody used their own map -- and took the score-O map home with them.
While I basically understand no Chinese (had trouble just saying 'thank you" correctly), no language barrier could obscure this one observation: the kids had a BLAST!
One weekday afternoon, at a "sports park" in Taipei (actually New Taipei City), I witnessed the introduction of orienteering to a large group of 4th graders by professional O-instructors. The sequence of exercises went as follows:
1) A star-course (?) set in a flat, open field, using subsets of several controls for a seemingly endless combination of point-to-point courses (though only 12 were used). The map was, essentially, a white sheet of paper showing all controls, boundaries (ribbons on two sides, plus cormer markers), start and finish; as with terrain maps, courses were overlaid. The "races" were 12-person mass starts. Timing was informal, and mostly to keep things moving. The exercise reminded me of the "sports labyrinth" activity at the O in the Oaks/IS/IC -- but without the actual labyrinth.
2) Smaller-group instructions in map symbols, using the ISSOM map of the park, while walking from the first activity to the start (and finish) of the next one.
3) Finally, a 50-minute. mass-start, score-O using the sports park map (I don't think controls had point values, but I could be wrong); timing was informal, and mostly for safety reasons.
Notable to me, was the fact that both course exercises were individual -- not team -- races. There was no "buddy system" like with Scouts, and everybody used their own map -- and took the score-O map home with them.
While I basically understand no Chinese (had trouble just saying 'thank you" correctly), no language barrier could obscure this one observation: the kids had a BLAST!
May 17, 2011 3:53 PM
#
" The link is navigation with a map. All forms are equally valuable, a start is a start is a start."
Let's take these ideas one at a time.
"The link is navigation with a map." - hard to argue with.
"...a start is a start is a start." - maybe Bill Clinton could nitpick this but hardly anyone else.
"All forms are equally valuable..." - I couldn't possibly disagree more strongly. I think there are valid reasons to consider some map-based navigation challenges superior to others and a start in one of the former therefore a more desirable thing to achieve than a start in one of the latter. I'm happy to consider and explore ways of making orienteering more attractive to newcomers or of offering other map-based activities if they can serve as effective stepping stones to orienteering (perhaps even merely if they can serve as cash cows to support orienteering) but my answer to Randy's question "...how far will orienteering sell its soul to change the product to better compete in the market, or be content with the pure product?" definitely involves limits on how much I'm willing to change orienteering to make it more popular.
Let's take these ideas one at a time.
"The link is navigation with a map." - hard to argue with.
"...a start is a start is a start." - maybe Bill Clinton could nitpick this but hardly anyone else.
"All forms are equally valuable..." - I couldn't possibly disagree more strongly. I think there are valid reasons to consider some map-based navigation challenges superior to others and a start in one of the former therefore a more desirable thing to achieve than a start in one of the latter. I'm happy to consider and explore ways of making orienteering more attractive to newcomers or of offering other map-based activities if they can serve as effective stepping stones to orienteering (perhaps even merely if they can serve as cash cows to support orienteering) but my answer to Randy's question "...how far will orienteering sell its soul to change the product to better compete in the market, or be content with the pure product?" definitely involves limits on how much I'm willing to change orienteering to make it more popular.
May 17, 2011 5:09 PM
#
I apologize for repeated attacks on Trail-O, and after this, I will try to not say anything more about it.
But, I cannot deny that I see it as an example of an endogenous product of the orienteering community, something along the lines of delivering of "[a] form of our product that is more accessible to the rest of the population." That is what motivated my comment, but I suppose I have wasted away any forbearance with my incessant attacks.
Changing tack... maybe we can look to a new metaphor. Orienteering is like a guy who wants to get a date and can't figure out why he doesn't. Bromhidrosis + cologne, pinstripes + Burberry plaid, the '96 Accord + dubs ... they are well-intentioned ways of improving the product, but to a mainstream audience, at least, they don't.
But, maybe you are a guy who just shy, but smells good, dresses normally, drives a regular car. Doesn't try too hard, but is just solid. Maybe you just need better promotion. Maybe you can't promote yourself, and maybe your friends aren't any help. You have a lot of potential though.
What is orienteering? Not sure, but I do not think that the current product is as visible or well-understood as it can be, and the proposed action plan does not strike me as the most effective way to spend limited funds to increase that visibility.
But, I cannot deny that I see it as an example of an endogenous product of the orienteering community, something along the lines of delivering of "[a] form of our product that is more accessible to the rest of the population." That is what motivated my comment, but I suppose I have wasted away any forbearance with my incessant attacks.
Changing tack... maybe we can look to a new metaphor. Orienteering is like a guy who wants to get a date and can't figure out why he doesn't. Bromhidrosis + cologne, pinstripes + Burberry plaid, the '96 Accord + dubs ... they are well-intentioned ways of improving the product, but to a mainstream audience, at least, they don't.
But, maybe you are a guy who just shy, but smells good, dresses normally, drives a regular car. Doesn't try too hard, but is just solid. Maybe you just need better promotion. Maybe you can't promote yourself, and maybe your friends aren't any help. You have a lot of potential though.
What is orienteering? Not sure, but I do not think that the current product is as visible or well-understood as it can be, and the proposed action plan does not strike me as the most effective way to spend limited funds to increase that visibility.
May 17, 2011 5:38 PM
#
What is orienteering? Not sure
It seems to work for the French...
consider some map-based navigation challenges superior to others
The other thread seems to overwhelmingly accept Thursday Adventure Fun Runs as (almost) one of ours. Novelty/trivia events in which, in addition to/in lieu of using a map and locating checkpoints, you also do push-ups, eat a bug or two, and take transit certainly are on the other side—this should narrow the line down somewhat.
It seems to work for the French...
consider some map-based navigation challenges superior to others
The other thread seems to overwhelmingly accept Thursday Adventure Fun Runs as (almost) one of ours. Novelty/trivia events in which, in addition to/in lieu of using a map and locating checkpoints, you also do push-ups, eat a bug or two, and take transit certainly are on the other side—this should narrow the line down somewhat.
May 17, 2011 5:44 PM
#
I agree that the product is not as visible or understood as it can be, since basically every time I introduce people to the sport they think it's great. They'd just never heard about it before, or dismissed it as boy scoutish and boring.
However, I think it's hard to market. Yes, we could market the current A-meet style product better. But having a bunch of introductory events, a little different from our standard A-meet, seems like an effective way to reach new people. Urban events, mass start events, social events are all effective ways to get more people to try the sport - works in Tucson, at least. They're fun for "hard core" orienteers, especially if it means more orienteering on top of regular events. And there's even a bit of recruitment and spillover into "hard core" orienteering.
However, I think it's hard to market. Yes, we could market the current A-meet style product better. But having a bunch of introductory events, a little different from our standard A-meet, seems like an effective way to reach new people. Urban events, mass start events, social events are all effective ways to get more people to try the sport - works in Tucson, at least. They're fun for "hard core" orienteers, especially if it means more orienteering on top of regular events. And there's even a bit of recruitment and spillover into "hard core" orienteering.
May 17, 2011 6:40 PM
#
having a bunch of introductory events, a little different from our standard A-meet, seems like an effective way to reach new people. Urban events, mass start events, social events are all effective ways to get more people to try the sport
saw that in a city park in Rome, Italy, a few years ago. The O club had what it called a "promozione" (promotional event) and it basically it costed one Euro to participate. There were hundreds of school-age teenagers, passerbys, dog walkers. The phys-ed teachers in the schools were told of this event, and they were very happy to bring the kids to a program already set up for them, with little or no cost to them.
Out of a thousand maps handed out in this try out, maybe one or two will become a regular at a local meet later on.
saw that in a city park in Rome, Italy, a few years ago. The O club had what it called a "promozione" (promotional event) and it basically it costed one Euro to participate. There were hundreds of school-age teenagers, passerbys, dog walkers. The phys-ed teachers in the schools were told of this event, and they were very happy to bring the kids to a program already set up for them, with little or no cost to them.
Out of a thousand maps handed out in this try out, maybe one or two will become a regular at a local meet later on.
May 17, 2011 6:47 PM
#
For non-targeted events like that I think 1 of 1000 would be about the right order of magnitude for recruiting "real" orienteers. But I think more would do the same kind of event again, if experience here in AZ is any indication. I think it's worth doing just to have a whole subset of urban/social experiences. And if targeted (to runners, outdoorsy people, map freaks) then the numbers would get much better.
May 17, 2011 9:14 PM
#
GuyO:
An addition to my comments regarding teaching school kids O-ing in New Taipei City:
The program I described is generally conducted every school day, and most often with two different groups each day.
The program I described is generally conducted every school day, and most often with two different groups each day.
May 17, 2011 11:34 PM
#
jtorranc: I'm happy to consider and explore ways of making orienteering more attractive to newcomers or of offering other map-based activities if they can serve as effective stepping stones to orienteering (perhaps even merely if they can serve as cash cows to support orienteering)
Then accept that orienteering (as defined) will be forever in the wilderness (figuratively as well as literally).
Does anyone like music? Is classical music the only true genre? Are there no superlative composers and performers of jazz, country, rock, hip-hop, blues, new age, world, alternative, dance, movie? Are these to be tolerated only as steps on a pathway to listening to an orchestra in a concert hall?
I love the wilderness too (around here, I have the highest number of starts in major events, possibly A and B-meets in NA terminolgy). But this is not "the only true way".
Then accept that orienteering (as defined) will be forever in the wilderness (figuratively as well as literally).
Does anyone like music? Is classical music the only true genre? Are there no superlative composers and performers of jazz, country, rock, hip-hop, blues, new age, world, alternative, dance, movie? Are these to be tolerated only as steps on a pathway to listening to an orchestra in a concert hall?
I love the wilderness too (around here, I have the highest number of starts in major events, possibly A and B-meets in NA terminolgy). But this is not "the only true way".
May 18, 2011 12:22 AM
#
Tundra/Desert: ...and take transit certainly are on the other side
Hey Vlad, I would have expected you to recognise that a race on a playing field that changes in a predictable way through time has an extremely challenging mental dimension. Introduction of "real-time-information" on bus-stop displays and thru your smartphone are eliminating the chance factors that used to exist, making it even better.
Hey Vlad, I would have expected you to recognise that a race on a playing field that changes in a predictable way through time has an extremely challenging mental dimension. Introduction of "real-time-information" on bus-stop displays and thru your smartphone are eliminating the chance factors that used to exist, making it even better.
May 18, 2011 12:46 AM
#
Is classical music the only true genre? No, but if I were the president of the Quantico Classical Music Appreciation Society and I steered a large portion of the organisation's resources into giving the members opportunities to be exposed to jazz, country, hip-hop, etc. performances, I think the members would quite rightly replace me and suggest that I go join or found another organisation with a purpose more in line with what I wanted to do.
Personally, I'm okay with orienteering being a small niche sport. I'm not under any illusions that orienteering is for everyone. But I think it would be nice if it were a larger small niche sport in North America than it currently is.
Personally, I'm okay with orienteering being a small niche sport. I'm not under any illusions that orienteering is for everyone. But I think it would be nice if it were a larger small niche sport in North America than it currently is.
May 18, 2011 12:52 AM
#
has an extremely challenging mental dimension
... and so does Trail-O. My beef with the bus isn't the unpredictable/unfair schedule, it's the lack of moving under own power/of physical challenge/of an athletic element. Ditto with eating bugs.
... and so does Trail-O. My beef with the bus isn't the unpredictable/unfair schedule, it's the lack of moving under own power/of physical challenge/of an athletic element. Ditto with eating bugs.
May 18, 2011 1:06 AM
#
I love all the discussion of ideas, but I agree with danf that it is time for some metrics and data. How many newcomers return after attending a score O event compared to a point to point event? What percentage of participants can we expect from advertising on trail running and adventure racing discussion pages? I don't know the answers, but I would like to see data to help clubs make better decisions.
We can all learn from what has been tested and shown to work. I tried some tests last year to attract college students; most of them did not work. I'll be glad to share the data, as well as what we plan to test next. And I would be happy to learn of tactics that other clubs have demonstrated to work to attract new participants.
We can all learn from what has been tested and shown to work. I tried some tests last year to attract college students; most of them did not work. I'll be glad to share the data, as well as what we plan to test next. And I would be happy to learn of tactics that other clubs have demonstrated to work to attract new participants.
May 18, 2011 1:35 AM
#
QOC just held our annual event, a score-O this time, as usual, on the University of Maryland, College Park campus and got a detectable amount of participation from students (3 people) for possibly the first time in all the years we've been offering free entry to any UMD student. I think all three were members of the campus outdoors club which helps us obtain our permit each year. Two for certain. Next year we may give the campus a rest and I'm thinking we ought to extend them the same offer for our event in Greenbelt Park a couple of miles from campus (and kicking myself for not thinking of it years ago). It may work better; it may not but I agree we should be experimenting more and documenting and sharing the results better. What did you try, maprunner? Or do you want to save a writeup until some more formal process is instituted to collect such stories?
Addendum: BTW, I also want to hear what has been tested and found not to work.
Addendum: BTW, I also want to hear what has been tested and found not to work.
May 18, 2011 3:14 AM
#
it is time for some metrics and data. We can all learn from what has been tested and shown to work.
Developed a very good relationship with the local adventure racing organizer, and got about 30 of the regular AR racers to show up at a six-hour mini-rogaine that the O club hosted in two consecutive years. The AR folks got to use for their own event the map that the O club produced, and the O folks vetted the course of the AR event. The AR folks are great in jazzing and sexxing up an event, and the O folks are great in producing maps and pointing out that CP # is off by 20 meters. So the two cultures help each other. Symbiotic.
We learned that the AR folks will travel long distances for an event that has a duration of 4+ hrs, but not for a typical O course.
Add to this the sponsorship by REI (retail store) and the mention on their newsletter of the event, and also the impact on social networks, there were many newcomers at the mini-rogaine, most of them hiker types.
A survey was handed out, and from the responses, we determined that the overwhelming factor for participation was some form of social coaxing. It was not a flier at the library or a mention on the newspaper, but it was because "Joe told me".
We are also noticing that none of these first-time participants at this mini-rogaine aka scavenger hunt aka amazing race in the wilderness, are not showing up at the regular O meets. Their feedback and emails are really positive about the experience at the mini-rogaine, yet they are not following up with their feet at the rest of the O meets during the calendar year.
For next year, thinking about offering a fee discount for those that show up again with a newbie friend. Sort of viral contagion. Bring someone new into this game, and you get a small financial incentive.
Two years ago, when we asked around what they wanted or not wanted to attract new people to this mini-rogaine, one guy yelled back "No Shirt". For a moment I thought he meant running torso naked, but no, what he meant to say that his closet is full of T-shirts, and he has no use for yet another event shirt.
From the AR side, they are getting alot of requests for these new types of "adventure" runs with mud pits, flaming bales of hay, obstacle walls. And those asking are not just dudes, but moms and daughters. So the AR folks are also trying to adapt to the changing nature of the clientele. After all, its all show-business.
Developed a very good relationship with the local adventure racing organizer, and got about 30 of the regular AR racers to show up at a six-hour mini-rogaine that the O club hosted in two consecutive years. The AR folks got to use for their own event the map that the O club produced, and the O folks vetted the course of the AR event. The AR folks are great in jazzing and sexxing up an event, and the O folks are great in producing maps and pointing out that CP # is off by 20 meters. So the two cultures help each other. Symbiotic.
We learned that the AR folks will travel long distances for an event that has a duration of 4+ hrs, but not for a typical O course.
Add to this the sponsorship by REI (retail store) and the mention on their newsletter of the event, and also the impact on social networks, there were many newcomers at the mini-rogaine, most of them hiker types.
A survey was handed out, and from the responses, we determined that the overwhelming factor for participation was some form of social coaxing. It was not a flier at the library or a mention on the newspaper, but it was because "Joe told me".
We are also noticing that none of these first-time participants at this mini-rogaine aka scavenger hunt aka amazing race in the wilderness, are not showing up at the regular O meets. Their feedback and emails are really positive about the experience at the mini-rogaine, yet they are not following up with their feet at the rest of the O meets during the calendar year.
For next year, thinking about offering a fee discount for those that show up again with a newbie friend. Sort of viral contagion. Bring someone new into this game, and you get a small financial incentive.
Two years ago, when we asked around what they wanted or not wanted to attract new people to this mini-rogaine, one guy yelled back "No Shirt". For a moment I thought he meant running torso naked, but no, what he meant to say that his closet is full of T-shirts, and he has no use for yet another event shirt.
From the AR side, they are getting alot of requests for these new types of "adventure" runs with mud pits, flaming bales of hay, obstacle walls. And those asking are not just dudes, but moms and daughters. So the AR folks are also trying to adapt to the changing nature of the clientele. After all, its all show-business.
May 18, 2011 4:16 AM
#
We are also noticing that none of these first-time participants at this mini-rogaine aka scavenger hunt aka amazing race in the wilderness, are not showing up at the regular O meets. Their feedback and emails are really positive about the experience at the mini-rogaine, yet they are not following up with their feet at the rest of the O meets during the calendar year.
Hey, no-one is buying the fish-flavoured icecream. Can't understand it, when we have hokey pokey they really love it. We gotta work harder on the fish!
Hey, no-one is buying the fish-flavoured icecream. Can't understand it, when we have hokey pokey they really love it. We gotta work harder on the fish!
May 18, 2011 4:24 AM
#
Tundra/Desert: My beef with the bus isn't the unpredictable/unfair schedule, it's the lack of moving under own power/of physical challenge/of an athletic element.
Dunno what sort of public transport you have in NA, but around here (with quite a good network) you do a big proportion of the distance on foot. All in the course planning. In fact the run/rest planning is kinda like "competitive intervals". Yet another dimension to the contest.
Dunno what sort of public transport you have in NA, but around here (with quite a good network) you do a big proportion of the distance on foot. All in the course planning. In fact the run/rest planning is kinda like "competitive intervals". Yet another dimension to the contest.
May 18, 2011 4:27 AM
#
Here is something effective to try with the 'mini-rogaines' as you call them.
Make teams mandatory. It seems counter-intuitive, but adding this requirement can boost attendance. Most novice meet organizers would assume that this creates a barrier to entry and reduces participation (and yes, it does annoy some serious orienteers). But sherpes was on the mark when he wrote, "the overwhelming factor for participation was some form of social coaxing. It was not a flier at the library or a mention on the newspaper, but it was because 'Joe told me'. "
Force people to have teams and they are forced to invite their friends.
Believe it or not, I did my first SF Night and Day as a competitor because a grad student in my department (not even an orienteer) heard about it, and started talking to other people about getting a team together. Pretty soon the word trickles to me... "Hey Ben, did you hear about this Night and Day race? Y. wants to get a team together" I say... "umm yeah, I've heard of it. I helped design the course last year."
Make teams mandatory. It seems counter-intuitive, but adding this requirement can boost attendance. Most novice meet organizers would assume that this creates a barrier to entry and reduces participation (and yes, it does annoy some serious orienteers). But sherpes was on the mark when he wrote, "the overwhelming factor for participation was some form of social coaxing. It was not a flier at the library or a mention on the newspaper, but it was because 'Joe told me'. "
Force people to have teams and they are forced to invite their friends.
Believe it or not, I did my first SF Night and Day as a competitor because a grad student in my department (not even an orienteer) heard about it, and started talking to other people about getting a team together. Pretty soon the word trickles to me... "Hey Ben, did you hear about this Night and Day race? Y. wants to get a team together" I say... "umm yeah, I've heard of it. I helped design the course last year."
May 18, 2011 4:27 AM
#
The ice cream analogy is confusing objectives. The volunteers providing hokey pokey are interested in fish ice-cream. They only provide hokey pokey as a strategy to stimulate interest in fish flavours. Their measure of success is increased sales of fish ice cream. If the new participants love hokey pokey and not the fish ice cream, then its smarter to stop diverting your limited resources to hokey pokey production and concentrate on doing well in the niche fish ice cream market. Leave production of hokey pokey to those with the passion for that flavour.
Another analogy is more apt- we shouldn't look for the lost coin under the street light rather in the dark where it was lost.
Another analogy is more apt- we shouldn't look for the lost coin under the street light rather in the dark where it was lost.
May 18, 2011 4:44 AM
#
You're onto it blegg. Been reducing the length of what we call rogaines and sometimes mini-rogaines, on topo-style maps of the urban area. We used to think 3 hours was short, now we have 2's and 1's. Yes of course they are "orienteering score events" but the expectation for a rogaine is teams. We "tolerate" solos but subtract 10% from their score to indicate what is the norm.
As you say you get social pressure. Hey Joe you have to come rogaining with me. Pisses me off that people say "I can't come orienteering, I'm on the XYZ team." Well we can fight back! Another benefit of the team is coaching. One of the team will know more than the rest, ergo skill transfer.
As you say you get social pressure. Hey Joe you have to come rogaining with me. Pisses me off that people say "I can't come orienteering, I'm on the XYZ team." Well we can fight back! Another benefit of the team is coaching. One of the team will know more than the rest, ergo skill transfer.
May 18, 2011 4:46 AM
#
On another occasion I was at the climbing gym, talking with a buddy about weekend plans. This naturally involved orienteering. The guy sitting next to us (working on the same bouldering problem) says "orienteering? what's that all about? It sounds like this Night and Day race my friends did last year. I couldn't do it with them, but it sounded like fun..." Now I could be wrong, but I suspect that the team format is part of the reason he even heard about that race.
May 18, 2011 7:17 AM
#
My 2 cents a bit late for the 15th of May deadline...
Above discussions are many if not primarily about older folks, and by that I mean anyone above 18, who have already been drawn into, exposed to, etc., a great deal of sports, and have already found favorites. Fewer of them will be drawn into new favorites as when drawing from younger age groups that have not yet been pulled into varsity and intramural sports. Peer pressure to join this or that main-stream sport, to help the school team, what not, is overwhelming at some point, to the extent that orienteering will only win over the other pressures if it is already a "beloved" sport for the teen/youth.
The thing Guy is talking about when mentioning Taipei, is that the club here is trying to learn from the Nordic countries and introduce the sport earlier to hoards of kids. The more kids are exposed, the more of them will come back - especially if there is some kind of point system (similar to the Little Troll patches) involved for older kids, too. Kids are collectors and traders, look at Pokemon cards, soccer trading cards, etc., and many will beg until you give in into their "collecting". I would thus prefer giving in to driving them to yet another O-meet to collect some O-point for something, over them buying yet another Matchattax packet... Which brings me to the next portion of "going after" the younger audience: if kids are to be involved after that initial field trip, they have to be driven to the places of orienteering, and there will be a point where you tap into a portion of those parents also learning the sport and enjoying it and coming, even after the kids have moved away. Increasing number of parents will in turn increase number of volunteers, as they try to help make the sport accessible and viable for their kids...
Having access to many smaller meets, in parks and urban areas makes it easier to organize them kind of ad-hoc, on the spot, kind of like the "barebones" no frills events, providing simple enjoyment, kind of like street soccer versus heavily organised soccer matches... in street soccer, a new comer can also pitch in by putting down his school bag as one of the corner posts, and the game can start...
In other words: many classes of kids being taken to O-field trips, combined with many small events they can try out easily after the initial field-trip exposure will result in more youngsters coming back as future athletes of the sport - that at least is the idea in Sweden, which the I-Taiwan Club leaders here in Taipei want to emulate. And compared to our home club in the US, I have seen here a much bigger growth over the last 2 years in the number of those (youngsters, but also parents) who will return many times and who have made the sport their own.
By the way, Orienteering is taught to Juniors in Taiwan HS as part of a mandatory course "Scouting", and many of the new coaches have gotten involved in orienteering that way. Singapore (where we lived before) has no orienteering whatsoever, and yet, orienteering as a subject in school, work with a map, learning about topography, how to transfer what you see onto paper, is also part of the mandatory curriculum there, only there is no sport for the kids to follow up in - other than the Amazing Race ;)
So putting orienteering into schools, preferably already at the elementary level (which I-Taiwan is doing through the field-trip offer), with many small area parks being mapped for the benefit of school districts, training PE teachers to be that first level of instructors, and having "field trip" kits available could be a great step...
Above discussions are many if not primarily about older folks, and by that I mean anyone above 18, who have already been drawn into, exposed to, etc., a great deal of sports, and have already found favorites. Fewer of them will be drawn into new favorites as when drawing from younger age groups that have not yet been pulled into varsity and intramural sports. Peer pressure to join this or that main-stream sport, to help the school team, what not, is overwhelming at some point, to the extent that orienteering will only win over the other pressures if it is already a "beloved" sport for the teen/youth.
The thing Guy is talking about when mentioning Taipei, is that the club here is trying to learn from the Nordic countries and introduce the sport earlier to hoards of kids. The more kids are exposed, the more of them will come back - especially if there is some kind of point system (similar to the Little Troll patches) involved for older kids, too. Kids are collectors and traders, look at Pokemon cards, soccer trading cards, etc., and many will beg until you give in into their "collecting". I would thus prefer giving in to driving them to yet another O-meet to collect some O-point for something, over them buying yet another Matchattax packet... Which brings me to the next portion of "going after" the younger audience: if kids are to be involved after that initial field trip, they have to be driven to the places of orienteering, and there will be a point where you tap into a portion of those parents also learning the sport and enjoying it and coming, even after the kids have moved away. Increasing number of parents will in turn increase number of volunteers, as they try to help make the sport accessible and viable for their kids...
Having access to many smaller meets, in parks and urban areas makes it easier to organize them kind of ad-hoc, on the spot, kind of like the "barebones" no frills events, providing simple enjoyment, kind of like street soccer versus heavily organised soccer matches... in street soccer, a new comer can also pitch in by putting down his school bag as one of the corner posts, and the game can start...
In other words: many classes of kids being taken to O-field trips, combined with many small events they can try out easily after the initial field-trip exposure will result in more youngsters coming back as future athletes of the sport - that at least is the idea in Sweden, which the I-Taiwan Club leaders here in Taipei want to emulate. And compared to our home club in the US, I have seen here a much bigger growth over the last 2 years in the number of those (youngsters, but also parents) who will return many times and who have made the sport their own.
By the way, Orienteering is taught to Juniors in Taiwan HS as part of a mandatory course "Scouting", and many of the new coaches have gotten involved in orienteering that way. Singapore (where we lived before) has no orienteering whatsoever, and yet, orienteering as a subject in school, work with a map, learning about topography, how to transfer what you see onto paper, is also part of the mandatory curriculum there, only there is no sport for the kids to follow up in - other than the Amazing Race ;)
So putting orienteering into schools, preferably already at the elementary level (which I-Taiwan is doing through the field-trip offer), with many small area parks being mapped for the benefit of school districts, training PE teachers to be that first level of instructors, and having "field trip" kits available could be a great step...
May 18, 2011 3:04 PM
#
To the Attackpoint Community,
I would like to thank you for your responses to date and the thought you have put into your responses. As I have been on the road and have had spotty Internet service at my office, I have only been able to scan from afar at a local FedEx office.
A couple things moving forward:
1) At this point I have printed all the comments, am reveiwing them and incorporating key ideas into the plan.
2) However, I encourage you to continue this discussion as you see fit. Just because I'm downloading information now doesn't mean we should quit discussing ideas.
3) As this plan takes final shape, we will need help executing it. If you are interested give me a call. 410.802.1125.
Glen
I would like to thank you for your responses to date and the thought you have put into your responses. As I have been on the road and have had spotty Internet service at my office, I have only been able to scan from afar at a local FedEx office.
A couple things moving forward:
1) At this point I have printed all the comments, am reveiwing them and incorporating key ideas into the plan.
2) However, I encourage you to continue this discussion as you see fit. Just because I'm downloading information now doesn't mean we should quit discussing ideas.
3) As this plan takes final shape, we will need help executing it. If you are interested give me a call. 410.802.1125.
Glen
May 19, 2011 12:47 AM
#
The ice cream analogy is confusing objectives.
The ice cream analogy is also presumably confusing readers from the northern hemisphere, including me, until I did googled the term. "Hokey Pokey" is apparently "a flavour of ice cream in Australia and New Zealand and consisting of plain vanilla ice cream with small, solid lumps of sponge toffee", as opposed to a group dance for preschool children. That's what it's all about.
However, there was at least one occasion when Toscanini's Ice Cream of Cambridge, MA, made a batch of tuna ice cream.
The ice cream analogy is also presumably confusing readers from the northern hemisphere, including me, until I did googled the term. "Hokey Pokey" is apparently "a flavour of ice cream in Australia and New Zealand and consisting of plain vanilla ice cream with small, solid lumps of sponge toffee", as opposed to a group dance for preschool children. That's what it's all about.
However, there was at least one occasion when Toscanini's Ice Cream of Cambridge, MA, made a batch of tuna ice cream.
May 20, 2011 12:10 AM
#
In the CDCO12 organisation in France, there were a couple of young orienteers part-funded by a youth employment scheme and part by the federation, I think. They taught orienteering in schools, mapped the famous areas around le Caylar and were main organisers for the 6-day. 6-day profits were enough to fund another year or two of work, afaik (with a huge 6-day volunteer effort).
Just sayin'
Just sayin'
May 20, 2011 2:15 PM
#
All,
Just want to say a few things:
1) Trail O aside, I appreciate all the comments that people made on this post. I felt that this was a highly effective use of Attackpoint. It is obvious that many people care passionately about our sport and this passion came through a series of creative ideas. You have my thanks.
2) I encourage you to continue this thread as you feel it is appropriate. A lot of good ideas are coming from it (if not for now, then later) and I would hate to shut that process down. Sometimes I feel if I respond to a post, that response serves as a catalyst to shut that post down. That is not my intent.
3) Based on all the input to date, I (with input from our work group) have developed a list of tactics to be achieved over the rest of the year. A lot of what, who, how much, when and comments. It takes 7 pages of strategy and back up and boils it down to a big "to do" list. Over the weekend, I will be checking with the folks that can do the projects assigned (or they can volunteer for). Most of these are members of the board, but some are outside the board. These individuals were identified because it was thought they could add particular value to a task. This list will be published by Monday on Boardnet, Clubnet and Attackpoint.
I think that is it for now. Have a nice weekend.
Glen
Just want to say a few things:
1) Trail O aside, I appreciate all the comments that people made on this post. I felt that this was a highly effective use of Attackpoint. It is obvious that many people care passionately about our sport and this passion came through a series of creative ideas. You have my thanks.
2) I encourage you to continue this thread as you feel it is appropriate. A lot of good ideas are coming from it (if not for now, then later) and I would hate to shut that process down. Sometimes I feel if I respond to a post, that response serves as a catalyst to shut that post down. That is not my intent.
3) Based on all the input to date, I (with input from our work group) have developed a list of tactics to be achieved over the rest of the year. A lot of what, who, how much, when and comments. It takes 7 pages of strategy and back up and boils it down to a big "to do" list. Over the weekend, I will be checking with the folks that can do the projects assigned (or they can volunteer for). Most of these are members of the board, but some are outside the board. These individuals were identified because it was thought they could add particular value to a task. This list will be published by Monday on Boardnet, Clubnet and Attackpoint.
I think that is it for now. Have a nice weekend.
Glen
May 20, 2011 4:21 PM
#
I think one of things we need to work on is our own view / expression of the sport.
In another thread Patrick says "The funny thing is... he emailed me about this, not the other way around."
I found myself thinking: 'That's not funny, that's awesome!'
Too often we express surprise etc. when people show an interest in the sport which doesn't help our image at all.
A friend of mine told me a good story earlier this spring. After discussing the sport with someone they asked him 'So what's not cool about orienteering?' and he replied 'Nothing. It's athletic and you use your brain, there's nothing to not like about it.'
Why do we all want to grow the sport? Hopefully because you love it and you want to share that love with others right? I feel like there are a lot of people that don't realise how much difference a positive attitude and enthusiasm can make.
In another thread Patrick says "The funny thing is... he emailed me about this, not the other way around."
I found myself thinking: 'That's not funny, that's awesome!'
Too often we express surprise etc. when people show an interest in the sport which doesn't help our image at all.
A friend of mine told me a good story earlier this spring. After discussing the sport with someone they asked him 'So what's not cool about orienteering?' and he replied 'Nothing. It's athletic and you use your brain, there's nothing to not like about it.'
Why do we all want to grow the sport? Hopefully because you love it and you want to share that love with others right? I feel like there are a lot of people that don't realise how much difference a positive attitude and enthusiasm can make.
May 20, 2011 6:17 PM
#
The funny thing is... he emailed me about this, not the other way around.
I should probably mention that his only previous "interaction" to me was through Facebook, where I would (posting as 'Hood Hunt) plug the my events on their wall, and then I would plug his event through the 'Hood Hunt. I also (posting as myself) shared some Garmin routes on the RoadRunner Sports page, and he commented on that.
I'm assuming that, before he initially contacted me, he only knew that I was the guy behind the 'Hood Hunt project. Unless he visited Attackpoint, he doesn't know that I have a connection with Cascade OC and Orienteering USA.
I found it "funny" because his events have big sponsors, lots of prizes, and hundreds of people. My events have zero sponsors, are organized kinda grass-roots style (we rotate through neighborhoods and course designers), and our biggest event had 38 people. He's a big fish working with a national chain. I'm just doing this with a couple of friends and I'd like to share neighborhood quirks with more people.
So maybe likes our maps, or maybe he just sees me only as a way to promote his event, even if it's only to a Facebook group with only 82 "likes".
I should probably mention that his only previous "interaction" to me was through Facebook, where I would (posting as 'Hood Hunt) plug the my events on their wall, and then I would plug his event through the 'Hood Hunt. I also (posting as myself) shared some Garmin routes on the RoadRunner Sports page, and he commented on that.
I'm assuming that, before he initially contacted me, he only knew that I was the guy behind the 'Hood Hunt project. Unless he visited Attackpoint, he doesn't know that I have a connection with Cascade OC and Orienteering USA.
I found it "funny" because his events have big sponsors, lots of prizes, and hundreds of people. My events have zero sponsors, are organized kinda grass-roots style (we rotate through neighborhoods and course designers), and our biggest event had 38 people. He's a big fish working with a national chain. I'm just doing this with a couple of friends and I'd like to share neighborhood quirks with more people.
So maybe likes our maps, or maybe he just sees me only as a way to promote his event, even if it's only to a Facebook group with only 82 "likes".
May 20, 2011 9:32 PM
#
bmay:
I'll just chime in to reinforce the idea that there are many different types of orienteering events that can all have a good place in our sport ... A Meets, Sprints, Classic, Adventure Runs, Rogaines, Street Scrambles, Billygoats, Farstas ... Variety is good, not bad.
I did a Mountain Bike race last weekend, something I have done twice in my life. The race I did was a 6-hour Enduro, an event designed for the "masses". The race was fun, the atmosphere was "festive". The "Arena Concept" was in full force with announcing, food, vendors, bike companies, etc. And ... beer of course. "Serious" mountain bikers may hold off for the BC/Canada Cup races coming up shortly, but this event was just the ticket for an occasional weekend warrier like myself. The sport is richer for having events for the "occasional" competitor as well as the "serious" competitor.
The other thing I noted last weekend was how many volunteers there were. Our community does a great job of supporting its local events (like our skiing Loppet in the winter). It is a really good thing to plug into the community ... as many volunteers become participants in future years. This is something Orienteering can do better.
I did a Mountain Bike race last weekend, something I have done twice in my life. The race I did was a 6-hour Enduro, an event designed for the "masses". The race was fun, the atmosphere was "festive". The "Arena Concept" was in full force with announcing, food, vendors, bike companies, etc. And ... beer of course. "Serious" mountain bikers may hold off for the BC/Canada Cup races coming up shortly, but this event was just the ticket for an occasional weekend warrier like myself. The sport is richer for having events for the "occasional" competitor as well as the "serious" competitor.
The other thing I noted last weekend was how many volunteers there were. Our community does a great job of supporting its local events (like our skiing Loppet in the winter). It is a really good thing to plug into the community ... as many volunteers become participants in future years. This is something Orienteering can do better.
May 20, 2011 11:15 PM
#
I have the feeling that an inclusive name for all of Brian's orienteering varieties would be more than just a badging exercise. A broad definition of orienteering is in our interests rather than a segmentation. We will still be tiny but a little less so.
A purely cosmetic reason is that the English word "orienteering" is overly long both in conversation and on visual materials. But this thought is mostly about asserting the commonality of athletic sports involving maps.
A purely cosmetic reason is that the English word "orienteering" is overly long both in conversation and on visual materials. But this thought is mostly about asserting the commonality of athletic sports involving maps.
May 21, 2011 12:35 PM
#
the English word "orienteering"
It's not. That's a huge part of the problem. But it's too late, branding has been done (for this particular org.)
It's not. That's a huge part of the problem. But it's too late, branding has been done (for this particular org.)
May 21, 2011 2:46 PM
#
Nick:
really like this thread-- i agreed mostly with Randy's 'novel' from May 16th, and some other comments after that.
May 21, 2011 3:13 PM
#
Nick ! where have you been ? too much Raid-of-the-North for you these days ?
btw, in theme of what map & compass land navigation sports attract new young people, was just this morning at the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, that mark the start of the mighty Ohio river, and an urban adventure race took place, with a nice crowd of young people. Trying to coax them into standard O events, and might get lucky if I get two or three.
btw, in theme of what map & compass land navigation sports attract new young people, was just this morning at the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, that mark the start of the mighty Ohio river, and an urban adventure race took place, with a nice crowd of young people. Trying to coax them into standard O events, and might get lucky if I get two or three.
May 22, 2011 9:51 PM
#
But it's too late, branding has been done.
True, but I think there's an opportunity to create a new "brand" within orienteering, and that's with the Adventure Running stuff.
Cascade OC already committed to doing a series of Score-O events from July-October, and once the "Adventure Running" stuff came out, we quickly decided to re-brand the series as our Adventure Running Series.
True, but I think there's an opportunity to create a new "brand" within orienteering, and that's with the Adventure Running stuff.
Cascade OC already committed to doing a series of Score-O events from July-October, and once the "Adventure Running" stuff came out, we quickly decided to re-brand the series as our Adventure Running Series.
May 23, 2011 12:13 PM
#
Round these parts there has been an on-going attempt to capture the perceived brand magic of AR for orienteering. Score events are part of the approach, but for standard events I think we need a long moderate navigation course. Probably 10 k or so with most running on tracks.
But maybe the perceived success of AR is partly in our minds. If not, why the thread on the AR part of this site discussing the potential dying of AR? Their problem seems to be wanting to provide races longer than what the punters are after.
http://www.attackpoint.org/discussionthread.jsp/me...
Its the fish or hokey-pokey question in another form.
But maybe the perceived success of AR is partly in our minds. If not, why the thread on the AR part of this site discussing the potential dying of AR? Their problem seems to be wanting to provide races longer than what the punters are after.
http://www.attackpoint.org/discussionthread.jsp/me...
Its the fish or hokey-pokey question in another form.
Jun 2, 2011 11:58 PM
#
PART 3 OF 3
"To the Board, et. al.
Here is the final installment of the starts and membership plan. It is our goal ot have these longer ranging plans completed in the months noted.
ESTABLISH A-MEET TRAVEL AGENT FOR EVENT DIRECTORS TO USE IF THEY WISH (SCHORR - SEPTEMBER) Provide this resource to allow event directors to worry about the technical portion of the events while providing an added service to orienteers.
2012-2013 NATIONAL A MEET CALENDAR (GOODWIN/DADY/MEEHAN - OCTOBER) Work proactively wiht the clubs to create a national calendar, taking into account potential rotation of A-meets between regional clubs.
INVESTIGATE FAMILY RATE FOR A-MEETS (SCHORR, GOODWIN - JANUARY) Look at economic growth and impact for family rates for A-meets.
TEAM RESULTS PROGRAMS/INTERSCHOLASTICS AND INTERCOLLEGIATES (DURAND - JANUARY) Work with Rules Committee to review this section of the rules.
NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT GROUP (FORGRAVE, ET AL) Look at new product/ events to offer to non orienteers getting them into orienteering.
ON LINE EVENT REGISTRATION (WEB COMMITTEE - AUGUST)
Launch new event registration software.
OUSA RECRUITMENT A MEET KIT (SCHORR - AUGUST)
Determine plan and materials to attract new members to OUSA.
ORIENTEERING NORTH AMERICA ELECTRONIC ISSUE (FLUEGEL - SEPTEMBER) Launch one electronic version of ONA focusing on clubs and teams. Use as a marketing tool.
EXPLORE NEW OUSA/ CLUB INCOME AGREEMENT (EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, SCHORR, CLUB LEADERSHIP - JANUARY) . Investigate ways to move this relationship foward while reaching goals.
If you have any questions or thoughts, please continue to respond to this thread.
Sincerely,
Glen"
"To the Board, et. al.
Here is the final installment of the starts and membership plan. It is our goal ot have these longer ranging plans completed in the months noted.
ESTABLISH A-MEET TRAVEL AGENT FOR EVENT DIRECTORS TO USE IF THEY WISH (SCHORR - SEPTEMBER) Provide this resource to allow event directors to worry about the technical portion of the events while providing an added service to orienteers.
2012-2013 NATIONAL A MEET CALENDAR (GOODWIN/DADY/MEEHAN - OCTOBER) Work proactively wiht the clubs to create a national calendar, taking into account potential rotation of A-meets between regional clubs.
INVESTIGATE FAMILY RATE FOR A-MEETS (SCHORR, GOODWIN - JANUARY) Look at economic growth and impact for family rates for A-meets.
TEAM RESULTS PROGRAMS/INTERSCHOLASTICS AND INTERCOLLEGIATES (DURAND - JANUARY) Work with Rules Committee to review this section of the rules.
NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT GROUP (FORGRAVE, ET AL) Look at new product/ events to offer to non orienteers getting them into orienteering.
ON LINE EVENT REGISTRATION (WEB COMMITTEE - AUGUST)
Launch new event registration software.
OUSA RECRUITMENT A MEET KIT (SCHORR - AUGUST)
Determine plan and materials to attract new members to OUSA.
ORIENTEERING NORTH AMERICA ELECTRONIC ISSUE (FLUEGEL - SEPTEMBER) Launch one electronic version of ONA focusing on clubs and teams. Use as a marketing tool.
EXPLORE NEW OUSA/ CLUB INCOME AGREEMENT (EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, SCHORR, CLUB LEADERSHIP - JANUARY) . Investigate ways to move this relationship foward while reaching goals.
If you have any questions or thoughts, please continue to respond to this thread.
Sincerely,
Glen"
Jun 3, 2011 11:41 AM
#
Rather than do family rates for A-meets (more appropriate for local events), how about the same rate for Students as for Juniors (and perhaps Unwaged)?
Jun 3, 2011 2:16 PM
#
Just to gather up all the documents in a convenient place (the other two parts of the second draft were posted in this thread), I put the three new parts into a single html doc, and linked to that here, along with the original draft:
Glen's original draft
Glen's three-part second draft
I have plenty to say on this (which I'm sure is no surprise to anyone :), but I just can't bring myself to address the specifics in the new 3-part plan because I think it has less detail in it than the original draft rather than the more detail we were hoping to see. Its very frustrating. To start with, the glaring removal of the cost estimates. I assume this was intended to deflect discussion away from the cost of each proposal point rather than to hide the fact that things will cost money, but I just don't see how we can look with an honest eye at each point without some idea of how much each will cost and exactly what that money will be spent on. We have very limited resources and this proposal is a *very* long laundry list. Some of these things just won't be worth the time and money spent, and the board members (and the rest of the membership) need to see that information in order to make informed decisions.
The costs aside, there is far less detail about the implementation of each point than there was even in the first draft (and there wasn't much there to begin with). Many of the points in the 3rd part are just general concepts rather than actionable specifics. There is nothing wrong with thinking in terms of general concepts, but that time is done. We need to put boots on the ground here. Words like "explore" "look at" "work with" and "investigate" are for last year.
Any plan put before the board now should have very specific points (including metrics for *each* point) like this:
"Joe will do these things, for this amount of money, and report on it by the fall 2011 BOD meeting with results to date. We expect (approximately) N new memberships and M new starts from this effort in the first year. Implementation time: 6 months"
Without this kind of detail, the proposed plan (and any money spent on it) will just evaporate into the ether. The BOD can't make informed decisions without specific, realistic information, and without that I will have to urge the BOD not to approve this proposal as-is.
Glen, each of the proposal points has a person's name attached to it. Ask each of those folks to come up with the specifics (like the example above) and just put those points into the proposed plan so we can have a look. Take 2 weeks to do this.
Glen's original draft
Glen's three-part second draft
I have plenty to say on this (which I'm sure is no surprise to anyone :), but I just can't bring myself to address the specifics in the new 3-part plan because I think it has less detail in it than the original draft rather than the more detail we were hoping to see. Its very frustrating. To start with, the glaring removal of the cost estimates. I assume this was intended to deflect discussion away from the cost of each proposal point rather than to hide the fact that things will cost money, but I just don't see how we can look with an honest eye at each point without some idea of how much each will cost and exactly what that money will be spent on. We have very limited resources and this proposal is a *very* long laundry list. Some of these things just won't be worth the time and money spent, and the board members (and the rest of the membership) need to see that information in order to make informed decisions.
The costs aside, there is far less detail about the implementation of each point than there was even in the first draft (and there wasn't much there to begin with). Many of the points in the 3rd part are just general concepts rather than actionable specifics. There is nothing wrong with thinking in terms of general concepts, but that time is done. We need to put boots on the ground here. Words like "explore" "look at" "work with" and "investigate" are for last year.
Any plan put before the board now should have very specific points (including metrics for *each* point) like this:
"Joe will do these things, for this amount of money, and report on it by the fall 2011 BOD meeting with results to date. We expect (approximately) N new memberships and M new starts from this effort in the first year. Implementation time: 6 months"
Without this kind of detail, the proposed plan (and any money spent on it) will just evaporate into the ether. The BOD can't make informed decisions without specific, realistic information, and without that I will have to urge the BOD not to approve this proposal as-is.
Glen, each of the proposal points has a person's name attached to it. Ask each of those folks to come up with the specifics (like the example above) and just put those points into the proposed plan so we can have a look. Take 2 weeks to do this.
Jun 3, 2011 4:59 PM
#
As part of the NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT GROUP, by JANUARY I will help interested entities, of both club and non-club type, create an event series in California, culminating with a series Championship. The series will last from late 2011 into late 2012, and incorporate separately branded, jointly marketed, key promoter-driven concepts with common rules and scoring. Each of the constituent brands will feature a distinct approach to attracting new people to the map sport. After the first season, plenty will be learned about what works and what doesn't.
I am very sorry for not being more specific, but unfortunately more details will not be available until we're all ready. These mostly aren't my ideas, I just hope to help these ideas gain cohesion and critical mass, and their proper authors should take credit for them.
I expect few new memberships and 500–1000 starts/year in excess of status quo (the majority of the starts counted as Orienteering USA starts, but some not). The biggest impact of this proposal may be not immediate new starts in themselves, but being an incubator for ideas that can then be transplanted nationwide.
Cost to Orienteering USA for this proposal is currently $0. However, should events prove successful in attracting new starts, I will ask Orienteering USA to extend its insurance to the whole series; this may be revenue positive, neutral, or negative. Orienteering USA may wish to become a sponsor of the series, thereby increasing its costs.
This is not all that the NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT GROUP will do, moreover others in the group have excellent complementary ideas, and I haven't even discussed the above much with the group. But since there is urgency, I thought I'd reply.
I am very sorry for not being more specific, but unfortunately more details will not be available until we're all ready. These mostly aren't my ideas, I just hope to help these ideas gain cohesion and critical mass, and their proper authors should take credit for them.
I expect few new memberships and 500–1000 starts/year in excess of status quo (the majority of the starts counted as Orienteering USA starts, but some not). The biggest impact of this proposal may be not immediate new starts in themselves, but being an incubator for ideas that can then be transplanted nationwide.
Cost to Orienteering USA for this proposal is currently $0. However, should events prove successful in attracting new starts, I will ask Orienteering USA to extend its insurance to the whole series; this may be revenue positive, neutral, or negative. Orienteering USA may wish to become a sponsor of the series, thereby increasing its costs.
This is not all that the NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT GROUP will do, moreover others in the group have excellent complementary ideas, and I haven't even discussed the above much with the group. But since there is urgency, I thought I'd reply.
Jun 17, 2011 11:37 AM
#
Without this kind of detail, the proposed plan (and any money spent on it) will just evaporate into the ether. The BOD can't make informed decisions without specific, realistic information, and without that I will have to urge the BOD not to approve this proposal as-is.
Glen, each of the proposal points has a person's name attached to it. Ask each of those folks to come up with the specifics (like the example above) and just put those points into the proposed plan so we can have a look. Take 2 weeks to do this.
Its been 2 weeks. Is Eddie at least going to receive the courtesy of a response to this point from USOF?
Given the amount of money that has already "evaporated into the ether" and continues to do so, it remains a fair question.
And keep in mind that since team funding was thrown under the bus for this, and the huge personal sacrifice Eddie has made over the past two years to help make up the difference, there are others besides USOF board members who have a stake in what is going on, and their queries and concerns are just as valid, especially when the evidence to date lends factual support to these concerns.
Therefore, they at least deserve the courtesy of a response.
This discussion thread is closed.