Yesterday I took a cut at creating a survey to collect data on player sentiment and preferences associated with the USTA tournament ranking system. The questions were designed in an attempt to collect useful data that might help as the USTA considers potential updates to the regulations. This post introduces that survey and shares my thought process. If you follow this site for the tennis related musings of an overthinking engineer… this content will resonate with you.
For those of you that want to just cut to the chase, there is a button at the bottom of this post that will take your directly to the survey.
I used the Goal, Question, Metric (GQM) paradigm when developing the survey. GQM is a goal-oriented approach popularized for software engineering back in the early 90s. The design process establishes goals and then identifies one of more questions that can be used to determine if a particular goal has been achieved. Each of those questions are designed to collect one or more metrics (data) that empirically establishes the answer. Rolling all that up the other way can be used to determine if a Goal has been achieved.
It was very natural for me to use the principles of GQM when designing this survey. In fact it would take considerable mental gymnastics to intentionally not use this approach. GQM is ingrained in the very fiber of my being.
The goal of this initial survey is to determine player attitudes and sentiments toward USTA tournament policy about the ranking system. There is no “hidden agenda” and I am not trying to use the survey as a mechanism to shape opinion or to drive the answers toward a specific result or answer. However, the results could possibly inspire a series of future posts along the lines of “let me explain why you are wrong.” I am only half joking.
I tried very hard to avoid pejorative language or ask questions that might lead survey respondents to specific answers. There is at least one question where the wording was really challenging because the situation is complex and required a lot of introduction. I won’t be offended if anyone believes that neutrality was not firmly established. I did my best.
Thinking ahead to the analysis also prompted me to collect some basic demographic data. I suspect that there might be some variance in how different groups of players answer each questions. For example, if there was divergence between how NTRP and Age Group Open players felt on an issue, that might point to a need to address different constituencies within the USTA Ranking System and Regulations.
Survey respondents who opt to provide an email address will receive a detailed analysis report with the results. Additionally, I will be conducting a random drawing for 5 Fiend at Court T shirts from people who provide that basic contact information. Winning one of my contests is currently the only way to get your hands on these highly coveted collectors items. (Please do not stuff the ballot box in an attempt to improve your odds.)
