Size does not necessarily define the impact of project outputs, nor is it essential to the classification of what a project might be.
Here is an example of a small yet mighty project.
I recently conducted a "micro-project" for the Youth and High School governing body, for a rugby State in the U.S.
Finite and temporary, the project was initiated over a few weeks, although initiation itself was completed in a few hours. Financial support was was limited, so the life cycle of the project was a few hours, conducted over a 3-week period.
This article illustrates the mantra "projects are everywhere" and gives an example of how project management can play out in practice - even in the most abbreviated fashion. The desired outputs of this project are to create a decision-making process for Event Directors at tournaments, to solve some problems, including:
the behaviors of parents and coaches towards larger sized players in formative stages of growth.
the inexperience of Event Directors in managing pressure situations, agitated individuals and sometimes "mob mentality."
the limited experience and knowledge of rugby in the community relative to the stages of "long term athlete development".
Whilst the project itself is small, the impact of the outcomes will affect a stakeholder group comprising several hundred players plus their families and coaches (so more than one thousand people are directly or indirectly impacted by this project, plus future generations coming into the sport).
The size of certain players at certain ages in the "Long Term Athlete Development" pathway, are risks that have to be considered and managed. Historically, the effectiveness of this has been on a continuum of "blissful ignorance" through "passionately amateur" which has hindered the implementation of a process that allows for "flexible risk tolerance" in a 360-degree environment.
Contextually, the organization involved wants to maintain a framework where young people can enjoy playing with their friends in a safe environment that adapts for the athletic development of the youth athlete.
Like all good projects, the initiation phase is essential to successful outcomes, and also does not have to be a protracted process. For those who desire a fuller understaning, here is a distillation of the problem:
"In a youth rugby environment coaches and parents will sometimes have issue with a player on another team, when they perceive that size, weight or ability is an impediment to their own team; even after a weigh-in, this consternation can manifest as a size issue.
An unfortunate “by – product” of “gamesmanship” in youth rugby is the use of larger players for excessive contact to coerce a win, creating a general suspicion towards larger players. In addition, coaches and parents can fixate on rugby as a contact sport rather than a skills game of invasion and evasion; as such, the weight of opinion can focus on size as the ultimate element of athletic or chronological development; skills acquisition, space management or similar facets of the game are important in terms of long-term athletic development and often overlooked in conjunction with this situation.
This can result in unpleasant sideline behaviors which appear logical and rational yet, on closer inspection are subjective interpretations, superficially dressed up as welfare issues. Ironically, the situation is reversed where a player is perceived, by parents or coaches, to be of “stud” caliber, and they wish for them to play up a grade in the pursuit of higher honors. It is important to note that bigger players are not automatically able to play in a higher classification, owing to the challenges of chronological growth relative to athletic ability and motor skills.
A weigh in, as the name indicates, is a provisory solution which does not lend itself to emotional resilience, mental agility, and physical functionality. It is also not considerate of all the variables involved with age grade athlete development (such as skills acquisition, executive functioning, and space management).
"Rugby State C" enjoys a robust player waiver system that allows for upwards and downwards vertical movement which covers policy needs. An accurate weigh in at the start of the season, should be sufficient for the entire period, as weight fluctuations over 4 - 6 weeks are not momentous for a youth player.
On a functional level, tournament and event directors need a checklist to assess individual cases and support any decisions to move a player into another classification or keep them where they are, when they receive size related complaints.
Player welfare is of the highest importance, within context and competency levels of the ages in question.
NOTES: age – grade rugby players are in the formative years of growth; they behave and play according to their coaching. Research suggests that age grade players want to play and interact with their friends rather than move into an environment where they feel isolated or vulnerable. (For example, kept back or pushed forward which may trigger adverse or unintended consequences.) Vertical movement of players is bound by World Rugby best practice guidelines (a single age grade) or accepted practice (two age grades).
Rugby is a late developer sport which means playing to perform rarely occurs before 17 - 18 years of age.
Comments