Meeting Notes/2015 Dec 8 TPG Goals Review Meeting

These notes have not been reviewed for accuracy by the participants and may not reflect their views, even when directly attributed.
 * "TPG decides/tests/starts implementing TPG Strategy" should be a goal


 * The table for goals should also show (1) goals from last quarter, so we can see continuity of goals and what is completed or discontinued; (2) standing goals, so we can see whether or not all standing goals are covered.


 * Can we phrase goals in terms of # of teams we are supported?
 * Tried that previously and it was rejected. Reason: metric showing we work with N people doesn't actually show that we make any improvement.
 * Are we getting sufficient (relative to cost) value from these goals at the group level, independently of the requirement to report them up?
 * We should have a max of three goals to have a good chance of meeting most of them.
 * Proposal for what the three goals should be:
 * TPG strategy
 * Something addressing Wes's target of "Every engineering can report their average percentage of core work relative to new work." Incorporating Maintenance Fraction, metrics, burnups, evidence-based planning.
 * Grace: if that depends on engineering work from Analytics, make sure you talk to Analytics before publishing something about this
 * David: Sounds like there is a deeper need behind just a maintenance fraction number, so we should find out what that is and get that deeper need into the goal.
 * Arthur:
 * Either a second goal around metrics, or something from standing goals.
 * Kristen: should we have a goal around team off-sites? Goal could be to run a bunch of workshops, training, and other knowledge transfer activities, and we could also do strategy tests during some of these.
 * If we need metrics showing an actual improvement, then we could ask people if they have applied what they learned from TPG. This would require teaching to be done by early February to have time for people to apply knowledge and then respond to a survey.
 * Arthur: This is another reason that the CSAT should be in our goals, because it shows impact.
 * Max: We have a contradiction: we want to show that we have impact on teams, and we can only do that qualitatively, but we also don't want a metric that really just measures likeability.
 * Edward is a great person for helping with surveys but he is overbooked. Could we bring in a consultant to help with a survey?
 * We could use CSAT, but make the goal to maintain a 4.0 or higher on KPIs (not perpetual improvement), and continue to explore other measurements of TPG value.