Where's Management?

[Scott DeWoody]

Visible on the network? Not that it matters one bit but yeah, I'd say so. Why do I and others do this, aside from our rabid desire to have so-called fancy titles? Good question ... it's becoming less and less worthwhile.

Tom, I really don't believe any reference to VATUSA staff not being online was referring to you, I saw it as more of a "if the shoe fits" kinda thing.  Of course anyone that has any dealings with you would know that that shoe does not fit you.  

[Michael Hodge Jr]

I'm not tooting my own here at all, but I found that the general public was fond of the monthly/quarterly updates that I put out when I was USA3. It gave the public a view of what was going on behind the scenes, created a curtain of transparency, and squashed any doubts about what I was, or wasn't doing. Everyone knew, for good bad, or indifferent, the current state of the VATUSA Training Department.

I never held any VATUSA staff position other than three, but am curious as to how you guys are getting it done without having the position filled. I was usually pretty busy with talking to TA's, doing the quarterly training department meetings, the reports, the continuing education training that was provided to ARTCCs, updating the TRC to add in the advanced sections, and managing the other things that came in, in addition to doing the website enhancements when needed.

In short I was pretty busy with what I needed to do. If there was/is a more efficient way of doing things, please let me know, as i am very curious for personal and professional development reasons.

[Scott DeWoody]

Michael, I agree, that was great info.... but you have to admit, without all the staff, it makes staff meetings interesting.....   ask a question, then run around to the other side of the table and answer it yourself.... LOL

[Alex Bailey]

The discussion in this topic has been quite interesting and I guess I will chime in since I've held the Division Director and ATM positions. The crux of the matter is that people tend to compare the operations of VATSIM or VATUSA to a real world company, or other volunteer organizations, or virtual airlines. Quite frankly, that comparison cannot and should not be made. I see references to Delta Virtual, and no offense to Luke, but you tons more staff than VATUSA. You harp on the duties of the ATD, but your VA has multiple staff positions each with multiple assistants. I'm not saying that this structure is inefficient or inoperable, but you have a structure that mirrors VATUSA staff and yet you're here to criticize how this division operates. You've said it many times in public as well as to me; you aren't a controller and you don't understand how the administration of the ATC side of network operates. You ask questions in this thread to seek understanding, but many can see the maliciousness laced through each of your questions.

Mike explained his duties as the training director while I was the director of VATUSA. My intent with this post was to chime in with my opinions and experiences as director, and what was going through my mind in the process. I must admit that when I initially took the position, I filled all of the vacant positions out of precedence rather than a true understanding of what each would do with the team I was responsible for directing. I began to wonder why we needed so many ATDs, why we needed a communications manager, and what the consequences would be if I decided to cut back positions. However, I did not want to lose the people who were staffing these positions. The contributions by each ATD, by Ric, and everyone else on staff were too great to ask them to step down. It was ultimately my decision not to remove any of those positions from the structure unless one of the individuals resigned on their own accord, which never happened (and I didn't want it to happen either).

My deputy director was Alan Hensley who openly admitted that his position didn't serve much of any operational purpose except to be an advisor. Alan was correct, as his position didn't have any tangible duties to be seen by the division. However, his valuable insight and our friendship (which developed after his appointment, I didn't know Alan before) was what made his position so valuable to this division. He was also able to step in when I was away and he provided oversight among the staff ranks so I could focus on other duties. Someone can comment that he could have been an advisor without holding the position, but this is not the case since he had access to administrative pages of the division that was vital for continuity of operations in case I was unable to complete my duties.

I also found Mike's position to be incredibly important for how I was running VATUSA. His duties seemed endless, and Mike has a special talent for communicating with ARTCCs and maintaining not only the training department, but also providing excellent advice and input on division matters as a whole. I don't think anyone ever truly realizes the amount of work that goes into this hobby until they actually take a position and try it out. Luke, you should explore the ATC side of the network and see first-hand the intricacies of its operation.

I say all of this for one primary reason: each position in the division serves as a member of the director's team. And each position is in place to house a leader who will serve and provide direction to the members of the division. Anyone who accepts these positions simply for the title will not last long due to the amount of time involved with running the division. Also, I believe that whoever is tasked with the responsibility to hire these positions will recognize that a particular candidate has applied to do the work rather than accept the title. Additionally, each director should choose how he/she wants to run the division, with the obvious exception that continuity of operations is important. During my tenure, I found that each person was contributing to the successes of the division equally and therefore I had no reason to downsize at that time. Each person was able to complete their staffing duties *AND* enjoy the network sufficiently if they chose to do so.

Did I discuss partially or completely removing the ATD position? Yes. To be quite honest, I did want to remove the position because I believe that myself and Alan could have managed the ARTCCs sufficiently without the position. As I said earlier, the decision was a tough one and I found that the contributions by Tom, Robert, Cornell, and Roger were too great and their assistance was appreciated. Had I made the decision to remain as the director for longer than I did, then I'm sure appropriate action may have been taken down the road. But it simply was not an abrupt decision in my opinion.

To conclude my remarks, I will say that Gary is the director and he has the ability to lead this division however he sees fit. If he can operate without a training director or a deputy director, then that is his right and he should be supported for making that decision. I think that as long as VATUSA exists and is in place to provide support to the members of VATSIM, then it will continue to do so with 3 staff members or 30 staff members. The goal here is to fly and control, and have fun doing so. As long as you can do both of these things, then it seems unnecessary to troll forum discussions with irrelevant dialogue. VATUSA appears to be running properly, and it will be the Executive Committee's and BoG's job to oversee and ensure this continues to happen.

[Luke Kolin]

The crux of the matter is that people tend to compare the operations of VATSIM or VATUSA to a real world company, or other volunteer organizations, or virtual airlines. Quite frankly, that comparison cannot and should not be made.

What you're suggesting is that VATUSA is sufficiently unique that absolutely no objective comparison is possible with any other organization, no matter what its nature. Therefore, we have no objective way of determining whether the structure and size of VATUSA is effective. In the real world, this is completely unacceptable and won't get you anywhere. And having worked in structured volunteer and hobbyist organizations for 25 years this year, I can tell you it doesn't pass muster there either.

Part of the challenge I see with VATUSA is that there's a group of individuals within an organization that aggressively promotes the notion that no one outside their group is capable of assessing their effectiveness with any accuracy. They don't seem to be capable of much introspection as to what of their duties are really necessary or required. Those are great signs of an organization incapable of self-improvement.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I see references to Delta Virtual, and no offense to Luke, but you tons more staff than VATUSA. You harp on the duties of the ATD, but your VA has multiple staff positions each with multiple assistants. I'm not saying that this structure is inefficient or inoperable, but you have a structure that mirrors VATUSA staff and yet you're here to criticize how this division operates.[/quote]

Alex, your analysis is completely faulty. You really should withdraw this nonsense.

You're absolutely correct in stating that Delta Virtual has multiple staff positions and several of those have assistants. But to claim that we have more staff than VATUSA is inaccurate. What you're counting as our staff is the equivalent of the ARTCC staffs as well. I have a program (the 737-800) with a manager and two assistants, handling 426 active pilots. Are you suggesting that there are ARTCCs in VATUSA with 3 staff members and 426 controllers? If so, my hat's off to you. If you want to make an accurate comparison, I'm happy to count our staff against the ATMs, DATMS, Event Coordinators, Engineers, Facility Advisory Boards and heavens knows what else exists at the local facility level. It might be interesting.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]You've said it many times in public as well as to me; you aren't a controller and you don't understand how the administration of the ATC side of network operates.[/quote]

Let me tell you a personal anecdote. I manage a group of a half-dozen software architects (what CNN called the "best job in America", and I agree) for a well-known US cable network. One of the less pleasant tasks of my job which I need to do this week is go through the annual review process for each of them. Now they're all exceptionally bright, talented and well-paid individuals, and while I understand some aspects of their job and share some of their skills all of them are far more versed in core areas of their duties than I will ever be. Now despite that liability, rest assured that absolutely no one would ever dream of suggesting that until I've done their job I'm incapable of assessing their performance, nor would I do anything more than say "that's quaint" and promptly proceed to do just that. (My own boss would do the same thing, except he'd chew me out for half an hour first for making such an absurd claim.)

So yes, I haven't been a controller. But to paraphrase Potter Stewart, when it comes to effective and efficient organizations, "I know it when I see it", and VATUSA isn't it. Based on what Tom's described in this thread, there's a fair amount of time being spent that probably can be avoided, and when I see existing and former office holders describing their duties in vague terms or challenging outsiders' ability to assess the organization's performance, that's smoke. And when there's smoke.....

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]many can see the maliciousness laced through each of your questions.[/quote]

With respect Alex, but I don't care enough about any of you to be malicious.

I merely find the VATUSA structure (well, a great deal of the VATSIM structure as well) to be ineffective. The technology stack is painfully old and obsolete, we seem to have a fair bit of staff turnover (the revolving door at VATUSA, ATMs quitting in a snit) and the whole mess with GRP indicates an organization more focused on policy than results (and a Founders' group that seems to have a passive-aggressive attitude towards pushing change in "their" network).

But it's not done out of malice to you, or any of the officeholders. I think if you attribute malice to my suggestion that your talents would best serve the network in a different role, then maybe something's wound a little too tight. The entire point of rationalizing the VATUSA structure is to recognize the fact that there's a dire shortage of good, committed people in the organization. Let's not waste them doing things that aren't as important as others. I'm not sure why you attribute malice to that, but it's not common. VATSIM is full of people who blindly accept the status quo, and even more who defend their acceptance because even the obsolete technology we've put together is indistinguishable from magic for a large percentage of the community.

You should not confuse malice with a lack of acceptance of the answers you provide, based on different experience than yourself. If I held ill will towards VATSIM, I wouldn't have waited and gotten involved with the ATO partnership with VATSIM and spent the time required to implement it. It's unfortunate that the answer to criticism is either to accuse me of malice or incompetence.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I must admit that when I initially took the position, I filled all of the vacant positions out of precedence rather than a true understanding of what each would do with the team I was responsible for directing. I began to wonder why we needed so many ATDs, why we needed a communications manager, and what the consequences would be if I decided to cut back positions. However, I did not want to lose the people who were staffing these positions. The contributions by each ATD, by Ric, and everyone else on staff were too great to ask them to step down.[/quote]

I think you confuse the elimination and reorganization of positions with letting people go, and that's not what a good manager should do. If you have a good team of individuals (and I've seen nothing about any of them individually to suggest otherwise) there's nothing preventing you from changing the structure to best apply these individuals - maybe that requires bringing things out of the ARTCC level to VATUSA, maybe it involves pushing things upwards, etc.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Luke, you should explore the ATC side of the network and see first-hand the intricacies of its operation.[/quote]

The time requirements to become an ATC (which seems to be a pre-requisite for anything in VATSIM) and the time requirements aren't something I can prioritize against my other duties (I have two jobs - one pays much better and the second is infinitely more interesting and gives me more scope for accomplishment than anything VATSIM could offer). Instead, at some point we should grab a beer and you can explain to me how onerous and complicated it is. As a sign of my lack of malice, I'll pay.

Cheers!

Luke

[Luke Kolin]

The turnover of ATMs in the network is relatively frequent. Each time that happens, the ATD may participate in an exit interview, and at least discuss possible replacement recommendations from the outgoing ATM. He will then cause an announcement to be posted, review applications, conduct interviews each of which lasts 30 minutes or more, make a selection, install that individual, and provide support and orientation while the new ATM settles in.

Emphasis mine. Perhaps it might be a better use of your (and the other ATDs') time to focus on why we have such turnover. If we have the wrong people in the job, then change the hiring criteria. If the job is crazy, then change the role of the ATM. But if finding ATMs is such a time-consuming process, then we either need to make it happen less often, or make it take less time. And if it results in a lower quality of hire, no worries - they'll be quitting soon anyways!  (I kid, but only partially.)

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Every ARTCC experiences occasional problem controllers at one time or another; some more often depending upon their size and complexity. These generally require intervention and or support of the ATD; he may mediate disputes, prepare evidence to present to a DCRM, and remain engaged in the resolution of the dispute.[/quote]

If you're regularly dealing with this kind of thing, then you have a problem. Either the ATM is a jerk, or the controllers are idiots. Either way, it shouldn't be something you waste much time on. It's a hobby - if I was a controller and I didn't like the facility, I'd just transfer out. That's all we do at Delta Virtual - if someone doesn't like a program, they transfer. Strangely enough, our HR staff doesn't spend much time dealing with this stuff. And all the DCRM formalities? Seriously?

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Pilots occasionally make complaints regarding controller actions or ARTCC policy. These are generally settled with explanation or possibly some revision of standard practices. The process involves multiple emails, possible meetings, and if a revision of policy, review and approval.[/quote]

Your complaint handling requires all this? Sounds like an awful lot of time spent.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]ATDs review proposed SOP submitted by ARTCCs for alignment with VATUSA, VATNA and VATSIM policy such as the GRP. In some cases this may require consultation with the director and/or meetings.[/quote]

How many SOP amendments do you guys make? How many are truly necessary in light of VATUSA actual traffic volumes versus real world?

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]ATDs review and approve proposed LOAs. In some cases these can require considerable input and revision, as in the case of LOAs with a VSOA. In one recent such matter, at least 60 emails were involved between a VSOA, an ARTCC, the ATD, VATUSA and VATSIM.[/quote]

Words escape me.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]ATDs conduct regular checks of the VATUSA member management system to ensure that members do not wait unreasonable time for transfers and other matters.[/quote]

I built a web page to do that in seconds.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]ATDs conduct background checks and approve ARTCC senior staff selections.[/quote]

You check CERT, or do you pull a FICO?

I don't dispute some of the other things you mention farther down in your post, especially at the Division level. But the things you describe above are wonderful candidates for examining whether all you're doing is truly necessary, and what would happen if you pushed back and didn't get involved. 60 e-mails from an LOA request? I'm hard pressed to find more than a dozen e-mails getting us certified as an ATO. What's going on?

Let me ask you a question - do you feel that everything you do is truly necessary? If you did half as much, would VATUSA fall apart? How much less effective would the division be? Before I'm accused of something, I'm not suggesting that you as a person are superfluous. But it's worth questioning whether all the e-mails, meetings and TeamSpeak conferences might be better served re-creating a training academy, or controlling, or instructing, or whatever.

Cheers!

Luke

[Alex Bailey]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]What you're suggesting is that VATUSA is sufficiently unique that absolutely no objective comparison is possible with any other organization, no matter what its nature. Therefore, we have no objective way of determining whether the structure and size of VATUSA is effective. In the real world, this is completely unacceptable and won't get you anywhere. And having worked in structured volunteer and hobbyist organizations for 25 years this year, I can tell you it doesn't pass muster there either.[/quote]

I see where you are coming from, but I still can't lead myself to believe that we can compare VATUSA/VATSIM to other organizations carte blanche. I agree that we can determine effectiveness through comparison on some occasion and it is obvious that we all tap our professional experiences and apply (or used to apply) them to the network. However, companies have individuals who get paid and by virtue of the position can be fired. Unfortunately, VATSIM doesn't take that stance and in some instances it seems it would rather defend the troll rather than support the staff who wants to allow them to seek other opportunities, which in turn would benefit the organization as well as the individual who is no longer performing their duties. Not to mention that getting out of VATSIM politics is a gift on its own.  

I currently sit on the board of directors for a non-profit whose annual budget reaches into the latter half of the six figures. I've attempted to draw comparisons, but I simply can't find much common ground. Both include a bit of hobbyist mentality, involve donated resources (and we bring in income from our operations), and have a staff who are dedicated to improve the cause. Beyond this, I can't make the assertion that a certain number of staff should apply to both equally. I think VATSIM would be better off if our management style was adopted, but we know that won't be happening ever.  

One thing you should realize about VATUSA is that you need to see the division management as a different function than the ARTCC management. I can agree with you from a standpoint that assistants at the ARTCC level is absolutely ridiculous, period. I believe an ARTCC can and should utilize an ATM, Training Administrator, and an events guy. Deputy ATMs, probably not needed in most ARTCCs. As for the webmaster issue which you frequently tackle, I agree that more cooperation and sharing of resources should occur in order to prevent reinventing the wheel 20+ times in every facility, but it is a position that I don't believe fits into a bloated mess regardless. VATSIM had talked previously about expanding CERT to allow ARTCC leaders to manage rosters among other things, which in my opinion would reduce the level of backend work that webmasters at each ARTCC need to do (and would likely remove the need for their position entirely).

With that said, ARTCCs each have their own flavor, or personality if you will. I say let them operate as needed with sufficient oversight by VATUSA to prevent malicious activity and favoritism, which tends to happen at that level more than others.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Part of the challenge I see with VATUSA is that there's a group of individuals within an organization that aggressively promotes the notion that no one outside their group is capable of assessing their effectiveness with any accuracy. They don't seem to be capable of much introspection as to what of their duties are really necessary or required. Those are great signs of an organization incapable of self-improvement.[/quote]

I agree, but let me address your statement with a question. Doesn't this apply to the Board of Governors and Founders as well?  

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I think you confuse the elimination and reorganization of positions with letting people go, and that's not what a good manager should do. If you have a good team of individuals (and I've seen nothing about any of them individually to suggest otherwise) there's nothing preventing you from changing the structure to best apply these individuals - maybe that requires bringing things out of the ARTCC level to VATUSA, maybe it involves pushing things upwards, etc.[/quote]

You're absolutely correct. In the instance that I described, it was my assessment that nothing could be done to keep those individuals on staff in the manner in which you describe. I didn't see anything that could be brought to the VATUSA level that we weren't already attempting to push voluntarily. Andrew did a lot of work as the webmaster to try and relieve those duties by the ARTCCs, but it was intended to be voluntary and some did use his services. The exception to the first point was after Andrew took over, when he moved Robert from the ATD to the Pilot Services position which had been discussed between all of us when I was still the director. It was entirely their idea and it was a good one, but it didn't resolve the issue of the 3 others and the communication director.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Instead, at some point we should grab a beer and you can explain to me how onerous and complicated it is. As a sign of my lack of malice, I'll pay[/quote]

I was actually driving through your area a day before the snow hit. However, your offer is enticing.  

[Luke Kolin]

I'm just wondering, does your ratio of 3:400 staff to participants involve personally training each of those participants in every level of their progress?  I'm not sure this is a fair comparison.

Do the ATMs personally train every controller in their facility? I left out the instructors and the mentors for that reason.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]So at first, the ATDs are unecessary because they don't do anything, and now they are at fault for doing too much?  What's your point exactly?  I'm afraid I'm lost here.[/quote]

My point is that a fair bit of what the ATDs are doing isn't of great value, or can be done more effectively. It's quite possible to be insanely busy and not doing anything critical, and this might be the case.

Part of the reason why I'm comparing VATUSA/VATSIM against other corporate and volunteer organizations that I've been involved with in past years is that VATSIM seems to have far more levels of hierarchy than any other organization I've dealt with, yet be far less effective and dynamic in its mission.

Cheers!

Luke

[Luke Kolin]

I see where you are coming from, but I still can't lead myself to believe that we can compare VATUSA/VATSIM to other organizations carte blanche. I agree that we can determine effectiveness through comparison on some occasion and it is obvious that we all tap our professional experiences and apply (or used to apply) them to the network.

You can't compare VATSIM to a single organization. But over time, the other organizations you belong to (for-profit corporate, volunteer, non-profit corporate, hobbyist) become a frame of reference in aggregate and you learn to weigh them accordingly. After a certain time, you develop enough points of reference and when you get an outlier in terms of metrics and effectiveness, it doesn't matter how unique or different they are - there's a prima facie case that the outlier is ineffective rather than the outlier is unique. It's rebuttable, of course. I've yet to see anything from VATSIM that does so. It has more levels of hierarchy and less results.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]However, companies have individuals who get paid and by virtue of the position can be fired.[/quote]

This is unfortunate, because as we like to point out, it's only a hobby. If someone gets removed as the ATM of some facility it's not going to affect their ability to put food on the table. In that sense it's easier to let someone go, because it's only a hobby. Unfortunately for some folks when that is the most significant accomplishment they can claim, it becomes very difficult. I know - 20 years ago a position in a virtual organization was the most significant thing I could claim. I've been there, and I was wrong then.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Unfortunately, VATSIM doesn't take that stance and in some instances it seems it would rather defend the troll rather than support the staff who wants to allow them to seek other opportunities, which in turn would benefit the organization as well as the individual who is no longer performing their duties.[/quote]

I think any organization that over-formalizes "conflict resolution" policies is merely asking for trouble. It does nothing but encourage jailhouse lawyers.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I currently sit on the board of directors for a non-profit whose annual budget reaches into the latter half of the six figures. I've attempted to draw comparisons, but I simply can't find much common ground. Both include a bit of hobbyist mentality, involve donated resources (and we bring in income from our operations), and have a staff who are dedicated to improve the cause. Beyond this, I can't make the assertion that a certain number of staff should apply to both equally.[/quote]

That's fair, and perhaps I should qualify (and maybe even backtrack from!) my earlier statements just a little. I mention DVA because we have a lot of members, and the staff/member ratio is very high, much higher than VATUSA. I mention it because it makes the case that a volunteer organization (a volunteer aviation-based organization, no less) can operate successfully with a significantly different staff/member ratio. I don't know whether the right ratio for VATUSA is the same as ours. Probably not. But when I see a broadly similar organization operating with numbers significantly different from my own, I pay close attention.

Another anecdote - at my day job, I report to a Senior VP who reports to the CIO who reports to the CEO. For my team, there's three managers between them and the CEO - some other teams have four. Most other places I've worked at have been similar, some have been much less. (You can tell I've never worked for a truly giant conglomerate.) And here too when I see VATSIM with so many (parallel) levels of hierarchy for a volunteer organization, it's valid to compare it to what I've done professionally and at least suspect that somethings out of kilter.

VATSIM is IMO too often fat, dumb and happy. When pilots do that, they die. Organizations, I suspect, aren't much different except that it takes longer.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]One thing you should realize about VATUSA is that you need to see the division management as a different function than the ARTCC management.[/quote]

I've not quoted much of what you said here but I agree with a lot of it. This statement, less so - while they focus on different things at different levels, to me everyone from VATUSA1 down to the lowest Assistant Deputy Facility Advisory Board Vice-Chairman pro tempore should be considered part of the VATUSA staff, albeit at different levels, and VATUSA should be very interested in how its staff is being deployed across the country. I'll confess again that I'm a ruthless centralizer at times, and VATUSA needs some centralized oversight and allocation of people. You've decentralized a great deal to the facility level, and some parts make sense, others do not.

My thinking has been that if it's not different at the facility level, you centralize it. Something like the old Academy was fantastic because it let you get some standardized training out and then let the facilities round out the local procedures. If you don't have enough people to do it right at the facility level (like web stuff), you centralize it. If you can't centralize it effectively at the VATUSA level

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]With that said, ARTCCs each have their own flavor, or personality if you will. I say let them operate as needed with sufficient oversight by VATUSA to prevent malicious activity and favoritism, which tends to happen at that level more than others.[/quote]

Agreed, and I don't want the local facilities to lose local flavor. But again, local flavor needs to be things that are truly local, which is local policies and a local culture that comes from people working together over time. Centralization aids in avoiding favoritism since once you have the data in one place it becomes very easy to spot the outliers and start questioning what is going on. Local flavor shouldn't interfere with consistent division-wide results unless the variance is expected in advance.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I agree, but let me address your statement with a question. Doesn't this apply to the Board of Governors and Founders as well? [/quote]

Very much so. I have few friends at the latter level.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I didn't see anything that could be brought to the VATUSA level that we weren't already attempting to push voluntarily. Andrew did a lot of work as the webmaster to try and relieve those duties by the ARTCCs, but it was intended to be voluntary and some did use his services.[/quote]

I think it might have been an interesting exercise to make things not so voluntary.  Interesting and valuable change is rarely voluntary.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I was actually driving through your area a day before the snow hit. However, your offer is enticing.  [/quote]

I was in a (barely) warmer part of the US that day. Next time you're in Atlanta, give me a shout.

Cheers!

Luke

[Ryan Geckler]

Dave took away my position.. I was very upset.

[Anthony Baker]

Why is there so much red tape in getting a policy approved,
Not to call anyone out, but how come it took over a month to get a simply change to an activity policy approved???


Why dont artccs use the Vatusa trc, wasn't it built to have a academy without instructors, yet every instructor is a little different in STANDARD phraseology,

If artccs would use the TRC then add in the local flavor training would take 3 weeks vs 3 months.


Maybe a better training scheduling system would help too.

IMO a hybrid INS post avaiable times in a calendar and students post projected avaiable times in a forum post. This gives the best of both worlds.

[Dan Leavitt]

Anthony,

These ideas are something you should take up with your home ARTCC. These seem to be isolated to single ARTCC's, not VATUSA as a whole.

DL

[Alex Bailey]

Anthony raises a valid point. The TRC was designed to serve as a guide for initial training, which could relieve the training department of each ARTCC from teaching the basics that can be applied anywhere. This would allow for instructors to focus on the intricacies of their individual airspace, cutting down time spent instructing and combating burnout by instructors. It was also developed so that all training administrators could edit the material to keep it up to date. I'm not sure how it is being utilized now, but at one point this was the intent.

[Michael Hodge Jr]

Anthony raises a valid point. The TRC was designed to serve as a guide for initial training, which could relieve the training department of each ARTCC from teaching the basics that can be applied anywhere. This would allow for instructors to focus on the intricacies of their individual airspace, cutting down time spent instructing and combating burnout by instructors. It was also developed so that all training administrators could edit the material to keep it up to date. I'm not sure how it is being utilized now, but at one point this was the intent.

Alex is right. The point of the TRC was two serve two purposes.

1. Provide a current, interactive way to teach the complexities of ATC to the new student in a way that didn't sacrifice standards, but made it easy. ATC for dummies..if you will. The long term vision I had was to at some point after the completion of the TRC, supply ARTCCs with an example sylabus of how they could use the TRC and other online training resources to make efficient use of their instructors time. All optional, as I wasn't big on forcing anything, but at least they would have the resources available to take it and run with it.

2. Serve as a way for the division to work together to ensure the accuracy of the material. Prior to the TRC, everything  had to be manually updated. With the TRC, every ATM/DATM/TA in the division can update the material if they don't like how something looks, is worded, etc. The edits have to be approved by VATUSA 1/2/3/6, and that was only there to as a safety precaution.

[Callum McLoughlin]

Maybe a better training scheduling system would help too.

VATSIM UK has an excellent training website which allows students to post their availablity on various dates and times, the mentor then logs in and sees the request and can pick from the availability before picking up the session.

I don't know how much you can see without being a member, but maybe something like this would be helpful - I'm not intimate with the way USA plans mentoring sessions.

http://rts.vatsim-uk.org/home/login.php

Regards from the other side of the Atlantic.