Greetings again!
You are likely here following Part 1 of my Program Coordinator application for Spring 2018. These are the follow-up questions, my answers, and some sidebar commentary on them.
1) Below you have the list of the other applicants; for each of them and for the current Program Coordinators, briefly tell us how do you expect your collaboration will be.
- Alfonso Bueno – Alfonso and I have worked together on a difficult project, and I think that since then we have had a good working relationship. I have no problems working well with Alfonso, and would be pleased to see him as a co-PC.
- CJ Crooks – CJ and I worked in key roles for Pastimes for two years. We have a strong history of working together and getting big projects (multiple Grand Prix) done. We don’t always agree, but we have never had a fight. I would happily work with CJ in this role.
- Edwin Zhang – I’ve worked only at a distance with Edwin other than recently, where we are collaborating on a judge token project for Grand Prix. I really like Edwin, and have admired his willingness to dive in to projects, so I would have zero problems working with him in this role.
- Johanna Virtanen – I love Johanna. I’ve worked with her as RCs and was recently on the JCC selection committee with her. We have worked together for years, and frankly if you took her for PC and not me, I’d be happy. I think we have gotten some great things done in the RC roles we have been in, and have had good interactions there.
- Michael Chamberlain – The biggest question mark. He just got selected for the JCC, and I supported his application there on the JCC selection committee. I’ve never worked with him, though, so I won’t claim we are fast friends or anything. (Note that you mis-spelled his name, his name is Michael.)
- Riccardo Tessitori – Riccardo and I have worked on two or three events together, and were team members once on a PT. In the months since Riccardo has become PC, we have collaborated on several things, and I think we have accomplished a lot. That is going to continue regardless of if I become PC. I’d characterize our relationship as “open” and “positive”, for all that we have interacted in person infrequently.
2) How do you usually handle conflicts? What is a good resolution to a conflict for you?
There are fundamentally a few types of conflict in an organization like ours, and I think they have different ways of being handled and different optimal outcomes.
[cets_callout_box style=’yellow’ align=’right’ title=’Context’]I’m actually not entirely sure what Riccardo was trying to get at with this question, so I defaulted to a “philosophy of arguing” kind of response. My hope is that it plays well, and talking about different kinds of conflicts will cover all my bases.[/cets_callout_box]
There are conflicts of execution. When both people agree that “something must be done”, but they disagree on what needs to be done. These are best resolved by looking at possible outcomes, and picking the one that is likely to lead to the most desired one. If it’s unclear, the person implementing the actual thing should be given authority to do what they feel is right, because if they have ownership they will be more engaged in the implementation.
There are conflicts of goals or philosophy. When two people both believe in a cause, goal, or idea, but the core motivations don’t match. I actually like these conflicts, because if both people have clear ideas of their philosophy or goals, oftentimes a solution or path that suits both can be found. These lead to synthesis solutions and force us to think about why we want what we want. I enjoy working with people to find common goals when there is a conflict like this. This is also the space where compromise lives, and compromising in a shared goal is the heart of how we should be learning and growing.
There are conflicts of personality. When two people just don’t get along due to history, or ways of interacting, or some other reason, they fight even when they agree. These are the most problematic, and I think what this question is driving towards. The optimal way I’ve found to deal with these is to give up “face”, let the other person “win” encounters, and work to try to make them an ally. I would term something like the way Justin Turner and I sometimes interact like this. We both like to fight people sometimes, and when one or the other of us is in a fighty mood, we get some heated back and forth. I try to apologize a lot when things like this come up, because I’m an adult and should know better. The real long-term solution is to understand politeness and giving way for others, because those are the social lubricants that make long-term interactions work.
3) What are your personal motivations on wanting to be a Program Coordinator?
Over the last two years, I have had a growing dissatisfaction with the top end direction of the judge program. I keep increasing the scope of things I end up caring about, because I keep having them impact my region and my friends in the program.
[cets_callout_box style=’yellow’ align=’right’ title=’Context’]This is the most honest answer to any question. I’m frustrated, and want to fix things. If CJ gets the PC role, and fixes things, I’ll be super happy. I hate saying “somebody else should fix this” and standing by, though. So, I’m fueled by frustration and an inability to stand by and do nothing.[/cets_callout_box]
This has really sharpened over the last six months, especially with the problems with the Program Coordinator selections of 2017 and the recent problems with Jeremy Hambly.
I’ve felt like I had to step in and help the Program Coordinators on several occasions because they were just not accomplishing things that needed to be done or were representing the program poorly.
My friends, my companions, and the people I care about in the program have been likewise frustrated, and I’ve heard a lot of their opinions privately or publicly about the feeling of disconnection and problems with direction.
I want to try to solve these problems.
Fundamentally, my core emotion related to program direction over the last year has been frustration. I’ve felt like I could help, could do better, or have needed to actually step up and do some work that was not getting done or not getting done to my satisfaction. This is really similar to why I became a Level 3 judge – I was frustrated that judges that I thought were worse than me were getting that recognition and I was not.
This seems like a weird motivation to me, but it works. It makes me accomplish things – when I see problems, I scowl, get growly, and then work on them. This is no different, for me.
4) What do you believe your scope as PC should be? How are you going to manage your time between being a PC, your other Magic tasks and your personal/non-magic life?
I answered this pretty heavily in my first set of questions. Right now the Program Coordinators don’t have a great amount of representation from the US judges (who are the majority of the program by volume).
[cets_callout_box style=’yellow’ align=’right’ title=’Context’]Not much to say here, I addressed this in my plans in the Wave 1 questions.[/cets_callout_box]
I would want to bridge into the US community, where I am well-connected and well-regarded. I would also act as a problem solver. I get things done, as demonstrated by my work on Exemplar and within the old Midwest and current USA-North regions.
I have a pitch for things I want to accomplish in my Wave 1 questions – refer to those for my schedule plans and desired contributions.
5) What do you believe a PC should be?
This is a weird and open question. It can be a “list the attributes of an optimal Program Coordinator” or “what role should a Program Coordinator take within the program”.
[cets_callout_box style=’yellow’ align=’right’ title=’Context’]This is my weakest answer, because I am actually opposed to the Program Coordinator role as it is right now. Soapboxing during an application is a questionable decision, but they asked. :)[/cets_callout_box]
The former is weird, because the nature of the role is that very few people will want it, and very few people will be effective at it. The real qualification is that you are one of the people that says “this thing needs doing, so I will do it” and you execute on that competently. Competently includes working with teams, having the willingness to admit fault, and being willing to give direction and take feedback in turn.
For the second question…I have opinions! I think the name “Program Coordinator” is actually kind of incorrect.
Structurally, the program has three main parts, and three Advanced Roles:
Running events – GPHJs
Mentoring and Community – RCs
Projects and program upkeep – PCs
“Program Coordinator” should be “Project Coordinator” and we should have a clear division between RC duties and PC duties, which we currently lack. The RCs are the least-dysfunctional operating body in the program. The PCs have functioned somewhere between “actively sabotage some parts of the program” and “not entirely dysfunctional but not getting much done” in the time since they were introduced as a role.
Having a clear division of roles and functions would give the PCs something more defined to do than what they currently do.
6) For you, what does it mean to be transparent as a PC?
Transparency is being open about actions and about motives, and engaging with people about issues. Being transparent is trying to communicate what is being done, why it is being done, and doing so proactively. Sometimes life (NDAs, or wishing to limit liability) get in the way. We should be clear about what is being done and why, so that people know if we are working within real-world constraints. (Which is usually the case.)
[cets_callout_box style=’yellow’ align=’right’ title=’Context’]I really really hope this resonates. Responsibility never divides, it only multiplies. This is the nature of it, despite corporate attempts to have things be otherwise.[/cets_callout_box]
I like transparency, but just as important is accountability. Knowing who made a decision, and who should be pointed to as the key person is important. We aren’t a corporation with top-down leadership that can pass things through managers to remain faceless. We are a group driven by people, and we take ownership of things on a personal level.
Hiding behind groups like “the PCs believe” or “the RCs believe” does not divide responsibility, it multiplies it. Every person in that group now should have complete ownership of those decisions and actions.
This is a paradigm shift in thinking about responsibility and accountability, but I think it is key to making any kind of social-pressure driven organization like the judge program work.
7) Do you feel able to act as spokesperson of the Judge Program in communications with WotC?
Yes. Refer to my answer about having worked at all levels of events, at all levels of the program, in multiple roles. I’m also an RC, and do this already for my region. The other RCs in the US trust me to represent them, and have pushed me to apply for Program Coordinator. I also interact regularly with multiple sphere leads, including the Exemplar sphere and the Conferences sphere. I have experience and the trust of a number of people across the program.
So, that’s the second stage of the application.
It’s a lot of words, and my commentary was probably more opaque than anything on this one.
If you have questions, comments, or concerns, feel free to comment here or email me.