Two things stood out for me in the last board member exchange. 1. The complete lack of use of technology in all things Sun City. We all have key fobs with our member id on them (I assume), but they are not used to their max by not collecting and using member use data in al things Sun City. If you golf, your key fob should be scanned, if you use any of the fitness centers, your fob should be scanned, if you use a clubs facilities, your key fob should be scanned. if you go to the sun bowl for the concerts, your fob should be scanned. if you want to use the LOCKED facilities at the ball park, you fob should be scanned, if you use the pools anywhere, your fob should be scanned, etc,etc,etc. Yes, technology can be expensive, but the data that it can provide is invaluable. Sun City has been at least 20 years behind in the use of technology either on purpose, or because no one cared. What came out of the member exchange if I heard it correctly was that it would cost 40,000 to use technology to handle ticket purchases. That is such a drop in the PIF budget (like mailings to the community) that it is laughable. Technology will probably reveal things that the GM does not want you to know. I reviewed the candidate forums and some of the candidates stated that they encourage the use of more and current technology. Lets see where that goes. 2. One of the last speakers pressed the board on the HB2374 and why the board was so in favor of it, but could not elaborate on why. They constantly tried to evade the questions posed and had no real reason why they instigated HB2374. These are my reactions to the boards responses to the above. Let's see how things hake out in April.
SCR, I feel your ideas of integrating more technology into the everyday lives of the members is a great idea. Then the whining of the entertainment committee could also be brought down to a minimum. The bus trips .the ticket sales and other venues would become more accessible to the members. No more standing outside in the cold. That same commitment could bring about outside classes such as those sponsored by Rio Salado. Of course this means asking the members what they really want in their communities. If asked of the community, how many are likely to say the patio at lakes east/west ? Which is five years down the lrpc timeline. Just another case of the members not being listened to and seen as the resource as they should be .
Good comments SCR. One of the things one comes to understand about organizational structure is without clearly defined goals and a long range plan, the status quo becomes a way of life. There has been little or no interest in technology by the RCSC. A friend recently toured the RCSC's "technology center." That's meant as a joke, because there is no "center," there's a place where they store their antiquated equipment. The last big upgrade was when the board was allocated ipad's to use while serving. Simply put, if technology is not a priority, it lingers as being what it is. When i heard the $40,000 figure to purchase software to be able to sell tickets online i almost spit out my coffee. If that's the reason, then there is no reason. When i go to the Bell fitness area, they scan my key fob and they do accumulate that data. However, there's countless other clubs and events within the community that don't. Ideally there would and should be both a short range and long range plan for technology to become integrated into our Sun City way of life. The good news is that is one of the key areas of concerns by and from the long range planning committee. It almost always comes back to the question: What is it we want Sun City to be? Funny thing is; when do we ever ask people what they want? We have it backwards; the management/board decides and then we ask people after the fact for their input. On this site, almost since its inception, comments have been made regarding our future. I'm not suggesting they were right or wrong, or good or bad, but they represent in part things people are saying, seeing and wanting. Compare that to the management/board identifying golf as the end-all-be-all and then electing a disproportionate number of golfers to the board; is there any surprise to the outcome? Imagine if over the years management and the board had said one of our goals is to begin with new residents and create a program where the 2000 homes sold every year included an in-depth survey and a continuing program of education regarding the importance of understanding how Sun City works. I'm not talking about indoctrinating people, but again if it's not a priority, what chance do you have have changing the status quo? The answer is none and worse yet, it appears to me they like it the way it is. As we have seen in the fight to stop T33, they want to be able to do what they want when they want. Think not? Ask yourself what Sun City would look like today if 8 years ago we would have been under T33 and every decision made had to have been done in front of people rather than behind closed doors. Would we have been investing 40 million dollars in a game struggling to hold its own? Would we have discarded the long range planning committee? Would we have ignored trends like life long learning? Turned our back on a Performing Arts Center? Been forced to evaluate buying the Lakes Club rather than investing in the Grand Ave project? Had to pay attention to people as they were clamoring for a basketball/volleyball court? The point is when we operate in a vacuum of what the management/board wants, is the community better for it? Or Worse?
The company I worked for in the mid-'70s had computer controlled badge reader access to their buildings and closed circuit camera security monitoring recorded on tape. Flash forward 45-years and consider the RCSC's use of technology. It's an embarrassment. I am guessing it's partly a result of the GM's reluctance to keep pace with the times, she hasn't exactly hired many key employees whose backgrounds were experienced in facility management and IT. But there is also the element of miserly past boards who didn't want to spend anything, let alone on newfangled technology. Without some competency in the use of technology, it's increasingly difficult for seniors to make appointments, get prescriptions, pay bills, find a phone number, etc. The RCSC could be a leader by embracing technology , by helping members become more comfortable with it by introducing it into the facilities. But there's little evidence they will do so, however, until the pressure from clubs and members is too much to bear.
Analytics; it is what drives the decision making process on websites. Search engines use key words to determine outcomes, other than the top spots which are often sold. What a novel approach; making choices based on hard data, not someones best guess. Of course the problem with that is if the numbers don't warrant doing something, disregard them. Pretend they don't matter. One of the reasons the long range planning committee was disbanded was because they were asking for the numbers and the GM felt it was too time consuming. Or, was it too revealing? While i was the chair of the communications committee, we made a motion for board consideration. We wanted them to approve a "beta test" using technology on a far broader range, with 5 clubs as the test market. It would include very large to very small clubs that would integrate hardware and software into every aspect of club life imaginable. It would be on a voluntary basis, with the goal of determining if they would be more efficiently run, especially on a year to year basis. Brilliant right? In truth, it went nowhere. Too many "security concerns." There's always reasons not to try something new. Most often those choices are made by those in a position they are comfortable with and able to control what and how things happen. If you recall, i did a thread on leadership styles during the last candidate forums, asking voters whether they liked the style that preserved the status quo, or ones that were more transformational? It was a fools game on my part because RCSC elections are driven in part by one large, active club and the golf membership. Not saying it's wrong, just saying it is what it is. After years of following that path, we are where we are. Golf got more than its share; other agenda's have been ignored, technology is nowhere and now we are trying to play catch-up. Imagine where we would/could be had we elected board members with a vision? Imagine if we had included the big picture community in the discussions rather than the small picture management/board? We had enormous sums of money to work with from PIF and the net result is we have dumped millions into all things golf. The simple reality is most new age restricted communities don't even have golf courses within the walls and if they do, they don't own them and try and make them profitable. Why you ask? Data. Trends. Costs associated. Interest levels. Generation X. Take your pick of the aforementioned and all played some role. It wasn't just because the builder hated golf, they understood the changing marketplace. To be honest,we are already a golfing community, and always will be. We need maintain, but that's wholly different than shoveling fortunes into them and ignoring the rest of the community. The really good news is the long range planning committee is back. They are asking for data, they have identified technology as a key driver and there are some really good people in place to push forward. In the end, they can only make recommendations. The board has to be willing to take on a more aggressive approach and push managements comfort level beyond anything we have seen in the past 10 or 15 years. If not, the status quo will rule the day.
