WestsoundBT
July 25th, 2012, 08:37 AM
Topic for General discussion:
"When is it wise to replace a stolen basket right away versus intentionally withholding a replacement for a particular situation?"
I can, and we have all likely seen, both strategies used to various level of effectiveness.
*These are two of the viewpoints often cited, but its also recognized that there are a whole lot of in between strategies and a lot of individual circumstances* (short term use marking sticks or tone poles are assumed upon detection)
Viewpoint A: "Replace Quickly"
Replace quickly believes that the greater good occurs when the basket is quickly replaced, either by using an available club or organization owned basket, or by expediently ordering a replacement with installation pronto. This is in getting to a "course standard basket" as rapidly as humanly possible.
reasoning: Basket theft is an extension of vandalism, thus strategies that work for vandalism should apply to baskets. Replace quickly, keep a great service level, and stay outwardly strong and undeterred. This viewpoint usually is accompanied by internal or external searches for the culprit with good notice that they are "displeased" with the occurrence, yet wish to move on strongly to continue to offer the same public service level.
Viewpoint B: "Withold and Apply a Squeeze"
Withold replacement, (or withhold the course sometimes) to make a demonstrable point that something egregious happened.
Reasoning: Allow the hurt to be felt by the greater community to bring out a general sense of ire towards those who would steal or vandalize in this way. Sometimes, there is a thought that this will apply "leverage" in the peer network to chase out the culprit. (let's discuss true effectiveness of this) This viewpoint wishes to enlarge the event so that it can be a community consolidator and provide a chance to bring the community together to recognize the trust that was broken.
Discussion:
I feel there are great motivators for both viewpoints and both have the potential for a greater good if executed well.
This discussion is coming out of a local club's situation, yet as much as a plan for action in this case has been selected, we've been interested to seek what our greater NW community has found.
whats been effective
whats not been effective
what ultimately would you like to have done differently
As well as discuss the two ends of the spectrum when it comes to speed of replacement versus withholding.
****NOTE: It is not my intention to garner ideas for basket protection.****
For this discussion, it would be great to consider that "a basket has been stolen" and that means of protection were inconsequential.
Thanks for your time in participation on this topic.
"When is it wise to replace a stolen basket right away versus intentionally withholding a replacement for a particular situation?"
I can, and we have all likely seen, both strategies used to various level of effectiveness.
*These are two of the viewpoints often cited, but its also recognized that there are a whole lot of in between strategies and a lot of individual circumstances* (short term use marking sticks or tone poles are assumed upon detection)
Viewpoint A: "Replace Quickly"
Replace quickly believes that the greater good occurs when the basket is quickly replaced, either by using an available club or organization owned basket, or by expediently ordering a replacement with installation pronto. This is in getting to a "course standard basket" as rapidly as humanly possible.
reasoning: Basket theft is an extension of vandalism, thus strategies that work for vandalism should apply to baskets. Replace quickly, keep a great service level, and stay outwardly strong and undeterred. This viewpoint usually is accompanied by internal or external searches for the culprit with good notice that they are "displeased" with the occurrence, yet wish to move on strongly to continue to offer the same public service level.
Viewpoint B: "Withold and Apply a Squeeze"
Withold replacement, (or withhold the course sometimes) to make a demonstrable point that something egregious happened.
Reasoning: Allow the hurt to be felt by the greater community to bring out a general sense of ire towards those who would steal or vandalize in this way. Sometimes, there is a thought that this will apply "leverage" in the peer network to chase out the culprit. (let's discuss true effectiveness of this) This viewpoint wishes to enlarge the event so that it can be a community consolidator and provide a chance to bring the community together to recognize the trust that was broken.
Discussion:
I feel there are great motivators for both viewpoints and both have the potential for a greater good if executed well.
This discussion is coming out of a local club's situation, yet as much as a plan for action in this case has been selected, we've been interested to seek what our greater NW community has found.
whats been effective
whats not been effective
what ultimately would you like to have done differently
As well as discuss the two ends of the spectrum when it comes to speed of replacement versus withholding.
****NOTE: It is not my intention to garner ideas for basket protection.****
For this discussion, it would be great to consider that "a basket has been stolen" and that means of protection were inconsequential.
Thanks for your time in participation on this topic.