There were of course some problems when ARCADE was first adopted. For example, some of the staff were sceptical that the bureaucracy was necessary. However, careful diplomacy persuaded them to reserve judgement, and they eventually became convinced of both the low cost and the high gain.
On a related issue, another difficulty was persuading the staff of the need for their laboratory data to be kept accurate and up to date. This teething difficulty resulted from a lack of their appreciation of the power of the system, and thus the consequences on student morale if data is wrongly recorded (e.g. an excuse not written down). Nowadays, as some of them become a little complacent, the occasional reminder is needed.
Related even to this, was the need to explain to the students that mistakes in their laboratory data will happen, and to ask them to help sort them out rather than get upset about them. The students are warned right at the start of the first year that they may get email messages containing erroneous irregularities. On a similar vane, the wording which introduces the irregularities messages has evolved over the years as insight has been gained.
Perhaps the most difficult problem in the early days, was reassuring some of the post graduate demonstrators who were affected greatly by the success of the system. This was especially true for those who worked in the second year laboratory. The previous regime had few deadlines, and so the demonstrators were used to chatting and drinking coffee in half-full laboratories during most of a semester, but with a mad panic at the end. This was so radically changed - they were kept busy from the start - that some of them worried they would be totally unable to cope if the work pattern followed the same increase as previous years. Of course, it did not!