Transfer of Ownership Meeting notes

Details

Date: 01/20/09
Time: 10-11:00 am
Place: 135 Maple Ave

Attendees

Greg Bronson, Graham Hall, Stephanie Herrick, Butch Labrecque, Irina Naydich, Ron Parks, Lisa Stensland

Agenda

Review LLWG approach https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/LLWG/Home
Recount Facilitation Team's efforts (ask subteam, round-the-room)
Review content https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/LLWG/Facilitation+Work+Group+Home
Get status update: what's outstanding still https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/LLWG/Facilitation+Team+Summary+Recommendations
Define next steps, assign ownership (group)
Status update on other groups (Butch & Steph)

Minutes

Facilitation Team Recounting:

Lisa: 1^st meeting discussed what are the aspects/challenges of Facilitation? Homework was to post on Confluence what questions would you ask/have asked in/before an LL session. Session 2 was to review & refine questions (e.g. make sure they were not Y/N questions). The team focused in a couple different areas: questions and tips for Facilitators.

Greg: used a lot of "pre-existing content" to kickstart us... had a lot of material to start with & discuss as a group in meetings instead of starting from scratch. Then went off and did work off-line. Group ended up with some condensed list of bullets that were actionable. Was skeptical at first about time commitment; in retrospect it was a good way to go since the group interactions were valuable and took less time overall/came out with stronger deliverables in the end. Looking forward to using these and seeing what the other sub-groups have and come full-circle to using what we initially were seeking.

Ron: first meeting had a lot of good discussion & we took a lot of care with crafting the way questions were asked to result in the most useful responses (especially with the "first group"; recommend we do the same with the "second group" of questions). We lost a team member (Micci) and everyone else stepped up to fill the gap & give input & share in the work. It was a good experience.

Irina: meetings, especially the first couple, were very productive; towards the end mostly had just to "polish" deliverables. All team members made contributions/gave input; good team work. She feels that their team's work is very complete and well-done.

Graham: felt like a voyeur to the process... missed the sub-team meetings (joined the Facilitation group late). Was glad to be involved in the overall process - attended large LLWG group meetings and found them and the outcomes to be useful.

What went well (summary):

LLWG was a high-value process.
People felt the team members participated (so work didn't all fall to one person).
People were empowered and felt motivated and the team delivered quality results.
Were able to start with existing content to get the process going.
Results are such that they are both immediately usable & useful and still can continue to be improved.

Review Content/Get Status Update (Facilitation Team Deliverables):

We decided not to review recommendations, rather, based on the deliverables' "completeness", hand off the recommendations along with the deliverables, & move ahead with defining next steps!

Defining Next Steps:

Lisa - PMO will be new owner and deliverables folded into CPMM (effective immediately).
Lisa - PMO will "take it somewhere else"; they will put Facilitation Team deliverables in to a new Confluence site as new/revised CPMM template. When new templates exist on the CPMM site & ownership is totally transferred, take care to have only one source of editable "data of record" (early/mid-February).
Steph/Butch - Preserve the LLWG content "As-Is" (remove "edit" capabilities to Facilitation Team pages, still allowing comments, after the official version is posted).
Lisa - will note on new CPMM Confluence site that ANYONE can use these deliverables (not just for PM's!) & there will be a process where ANYONE can make comments to improve content after we post the "first release" (note: Ron has some stuff he would like to add, but Lisa recommends that we declare victory and publish a first release)
Lisa (& Facilitation Team?) - PMO can reference the Comments at https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/LLWG/Facilitation+Team+Summary+Recommendations and use those to make changes to the new CPMM content (as desired)
Butch/Steph - get future status updates from Lisa.
Ron /Lisa - set agenda for first PM-SIG meeting in late February; we can "socialize" the Facilitation Team deliverables at the first meeting. Lisa recommended that we present how the LLWG process worked, then share the new content with the PM-SIG. PM-SIG will probably provide feedback/actionable items, which the LLWG Facilitation Team could act upon.

Status from Other Sub-teams:

Best Practices - Lisa met with RJ to discuss PM-SIG's role in defining "BP" processes. PM-SIG does not want to become a big bureaucratic organization that exists just to define and put boxes around things. PM-SIG may be best suited as a place to elevate/highlight/share Best Practices.

Sharing Outcomes - investigation into how best to pilot the Sharing Outcomes team's repository (https://forge.cornell.edu/sf/tracker/do/listArtifacts/projects.cit-is_lessons_learned_project/tracker.lessons_learned) has been taking place. Jean Gustafson & Chris O'Brien met with RJ in January to discuss choosing a pilot for the IS PM's. Stephanie and Butch have been piloting the repository using a real LL incident that occurred between their two projects (see https://forge.cornell.edu/sf/go/artf16854?nav=1) and have asked several people for feedback on the usefulness/usability of the repository given a specific, real-life LL and how it may spin off an actionable set of work resulting in a new Best Practice (which in this case it did, a revised PSDeveloper Tech Doc template).