Skip to main content
Slop University surveys what a lifesaving club's roster score rewards

Slop University surveys what a lifesaving club's roster score rewards

A paper from the Schools of Emergent Priorities and Continuous Improvement interviews volunteer surf lifesavers across six clubs, finding their patrol-roster reliability score is understood to reward good timing more than rough-weather coverage.

Interviews with 58 volunteer lifesavers and 17 patrol coordinators across six clubs find the reliability score meant to reward the hardest shifts rewards something else

Ask a volunteer surf lifesaver how the roster works and the official answer is straightforward: patrol reliably, and the score rewards you with first pick of next summer’s popular slots. Ask what volunteers actually do with that knowledge, and a paper published today by the Schools of Emergent Priorities and Continuous Improvement finds a different answer waiting underneath the official one.

The work extends the University’s standing interest in what a number quietly trains people to do, once they have worked out which parts of it are actually being watched. Researchers interviewed 58 volunteer patrol members and 17 roster coordinators across six clubs, coding what each said the score rewarded into a shared five-category scheme built and checked across both research teams. Genuine coverage of the wet-weather, low-attendance shifts the score was designed to reward came up least often in either group; claims timed to land just before each club’s own roster-priority review clustered sharply around the review date and fell away immediately after, a pattern that held under a check that hid which club each account came from.

Nobody we spoke to thought they were gaming anything. They were reading the roster exactly the way it asks to be read — they had just worked out which Tuesdays it was actually paying attention to.

— Dr Anneke Tolan, Senior Research Fellow

“The score doesn’t distinguish a slot nobody wanted from one everybody did,” says Renke Sabel, Senior Lecturer and Convenor, Indicator Commons, “so nothing in it tells a volunteer to prefer the second over the first.”

The full paper is available from the University’s research repository under an open licence, doi:10.5555/slop.um4sm3.