ISAF has published a new document on Umpire Grouping for 2009.
Biggest change is the introduction of Subcategories for group 2 into 2a, 2b and 2c. The purpose of this change is to (1) improve the feedback to individual Group 2 IUs about the way their competence is perceived and (2) provide the Race Officials Coordinator with a better basis for composing umpire teams with well-balanced competences. You can read the whole document here.
As I've had no experience with the system, being a NAIU, I wonder what experienced IU think of it. If some of you read this, please leave a comment or mail me. I will also ask when I have the opportunity at an event.
I can understand and support the need for a system providing feedback and evaluation on individual performances, but that should be done as a normal open procedure. I don't like the whole secrecy around it, with the identity of grouping panel kept confidential until the end of the year. Why should you have to wait to hear comments and start work on improving until the end of the year? Isn't it better to hear right away?
I will ask IU's I work with anyway, regardless of there "secret identity". [G]
I don't have any experience with the international community of officials but this secrecy is something that doesn't correspond to my experiences in the Dutch community of officials.
ReplyDeleteEspecially the part where the document states that 'the identity of the members of the Grouping panel will not be known to any IU,
including the other members of the panel' strikes me as inefficient.
In point 9 of the list of the process there is a possibility mentioned for feedback and like you said, there's always the possibility of getting feedback from IU's yourself.