Positive or Negative?

I got into an interesting conversation recently. It evolved into a discussion about how FIRST is presented to the world. In general it's all positive. What I mean by that is we talk about all the great things FIRST does and the opportunities that open up to FIRST kids as they move into college and beyond.

The interesting point of the discussion however was how most of the population makes decisions - and it's instructive. First, people are not "hard wired" to accept change, in fact we are programmed over years and years to resist it. FIRST represents change. Second, most people are not "early adopters" partially for the reason above but as much because they don't want to stand out or look foolish if they choose something different.

I am convinced that most of the FIRST community is unlike the average. You have adopted FIRST and you each understand it.

So... if we turned the conversation around along the lines of "you haven't got your kids into FIRST? you realize that jobs are out there, scholarships are available, and at the present rate of change your kids risk being left behind..." what would happen?

Following the line of reason above, that negative approach would appeal to the later adopters, the ones that don't want to be left behind (and thus stand out). The fear of being without FIRST would then outweigh the fear of not changing.

Don't take this as any type of mandate in how you talk about FIRST, but do use it as food for thought as you think about how we grow - and who get's left behind...