On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:57 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Tilman Bayer wrote:
Quarterly review minutes and/or slides of the following teams have
been posted in recent days:
Legal Community Advocacy:
Fundraising and Fundraising Tech:
(slides only, as a report - no actual meeting took place)
I'm trying to understand why certain groups seem to have had a formal
quarterly review (with minutes on a corresponding Meta-Wiki page) and why
others seem to have bypassed this process. Why wasn't there a review for
two of the four groups mentioned (Communications and Legal Community
Advocacy)? Publishing slides is better than nothing, I suppose, but it
seems strange to not hold a formal quarterly review for these two teams.
This was actually the first time that groups outside Engineering and
Grantmaking took part in the quarterly review process. While indeed
almost every team or department was conducting quarterly review
meetings this time, bear in mind that the process is still being
worked on and rethought, e.g. regarding the amount of detail covered
in each meeting (corresponding to its length), and what level of
involvement from senior management should be required in each case.
As recorded on the overview page, Legal Community Advocacy held in
fact a quarterly review meeting on January 30, it's just that we
decided not to publish minutes because much of the discussion was
confidential and sensitive - perhaps unsurprisingly, considering the
department's work area.
Because the Communications department is still in build-up mode, there
was a sense that a formal quarterly review meeting did not yet make
sense for them this time. But the team decided to nevertheless produce
a full slide deck that, I think, contains a lot of relevant
information about its Q2 work.
IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: