Team Practices Group/Retrospectives/2017-05-25

= Previous Action Items =
 * None.
 * Full notes from last retro (2017-04-27)

= What has happened since the last retro (2017-04-27)? =
 * Parties:
 * Google staff mixer
 * Michelle’s going away mixer


 * Events:
 * Hackathon
 * Disco(very) offsite
 * WikiCite
 * Engagement Survey
 * Start of Annual Review season


 * Meetings:
 * 2017-04-28 Org Tune-Up announcement in a meeting (where Toby and Victoria shared decks)
 * 2017-04-28  TPG-only meeting to process the Org Tune-Up announcement in a meeting
 * 2017-05-17(?) All-hands brown-bag presentation of final Org Tune-Up proposal
 * And video encores
 * 2017-05-19 TPG/Stillwell meeting to plan the path forward
 * 2017-05-19 TPG/Stillwell post-meeting debrief
 * TPG meeting with Spotify JA
 * First Intercultural Initiative meeting with wider community outside of core team
 * Grace presented Agile Explainer at Monthly Roundtable
 * TensorFlow (Google Machine learning tool) Seminar
 * KL and Arthur met with Anna S. and other T & Cs for three days to orient to new roles


 * Changes
 * Grace’s post-Org Tune-Up role shifted to an as-yet-to-be determined title for her  operational role in Audiences
 * Kevin’s post-Org Tune-Up role shifted to Technology
 * End of TPG -> beginning of TPG JA JA
 * All TPGers getting new bosses
 * Arthur and Kristen’s new boss and roles
 * Communications department leadership plan


 * Arrivals:
 * KL & AR in SF week of 2017-05-01
 * Natalia moved to the US
 * Eileen started as General Counsel


 * Departures:
 * Jeff Elder left
 * Amy Elder left
 * Michelle left


 * Facilitation:
 * Grace & Guillaume paired on survey analysis for Movement Strategy team retrospective which Grace facilitated
 * Joel and most of TPG facilitated Movement Strategy meetings
 * Grace facilitated a couple of retros for Global Reach team
 * Grace helped Anti-Harassment team to generate team norms
 * Light Engagements:
 * Grace observed Community Tech team
 * Kevin helped ArchComm finish their charter
 * Grace met with Darian regarding project management of a collab between Security and RelEng and with Lena regarding her interest in project management.
 * Natalia helped Reading Infrastructure consolidate their Phab boards

= What went well =
 * Arrival:
 * KL: New Wolf in the USA
 * NH: Working during the day is better than I thought
 * GG: Knowing that it’s not midnight Tea Time for Natalia any longer
 * KL: Had a good orientation to new role
 * NH: Warm welcome from Reading
 * Good meetings
 * KS: Grace and Kevin had a great meeting to compare notes on the concept of a “Departmental Agilist”, and to review the Technology Program Manager JDs.
 * Maybe not Department Agilist after all; actually different than D.A.: GG will be … (“chief of staff”<---with permanent quotation marks) whereas KS will be Program Manager
 * KL: Greater potential for Bumblebeeing
 * KS: TPG meetings to discuss the Org Tune-Up were very helpful for mental health.
 * GG: Good impromptu meeting conversations with KL
 * Good taking care of selves:
 * GG: Joel taking a family day
 * GG: Kevin extending his vacation
 * JA: Vacation
 * KL: went to Nantucket for weekend - islands are good
 * GG took a day off and missed some Org Tune-Up meetings
 * NH joined a gym where she can watch Netflix on a treadmill
 * Org Tune-Up
 * NH: It’s comforting to be in the “transition” phase of the Org Tune-Up, constant clarifying was tiring. +1 from GG
 * GG: Kevin keeping us posted on Org Tune-Up decisions as well as updates to the Talk page
 * KL: Getting excited thinking about potential for TPGuild
 * Pack love:
 * GG: Kevin taking the initiative to meet with me about our respective new roles
 * GG: Joel taking initiative on Phlog/Phab
 * GG: Max’s updates on important developments in office supply technologies
 * GG: Joel trolling Max in the Tea Time topic spreadsheet and the GRAX response
 * GG: Kevin helping me with his gDocs fu
 * GG: Natalia for her work on the Intercultural Initiative
 * Engagements
 * GG: Great to help the form Anti-Harassment team develop good teamyness habits from the get-go NH  (1)
 * JA: Editing Vertical re-org coaching is unblocked after 3-month delay.
 * KS: Disco offsite went great. Max was awesome. It was much more fluid and spontaneous than the previous all-Discovery offsite, which was appropriate given the current situation.
 * GG: Pairing with GuillaumeP on the Movement Strategy retro and pioneering the anonymous survey conversation-starter
 * GG: Great to get to interact a bit with Community Tech and Global Reach
 * NH helped Reading Infra and it was a pleasure
 * GG told Fr-tech she’d be moving off of the team as a result of Org Tune-Up
 * TPG Projects and Other
 * JA: Added some low-cost, high-value features to Phlogiston (last-quarter burnup, last-quarter status report)
 * JA: Minor signs that Phacility will actually consider our Phab reporting requests
 * KL: Good to get Collab Jam post out - helped to shine some objective light on the event
 * KL: enjoyed TeaTime topic on “can people change?”

= What could have gone better =
 * Org Tune-Up
 * KS: I wish I had been informed that the Technology role being offered to me was actually as a Program Manager, not as an Agile Coach. GG KL
 * KS: I wish we would have known that the Org Tune-Up proposal we poured so much time and effort into was going to be almost entirely ignored/dismissed.
 * JA: I wish I had been consulted on Org Tune-Up.  By the time I was informed of a proposal to change my role, it seemed that the decision was complete and final. GG NH
 * JA: Org Tune-Up didn’t cover what I consider the main legitimate issue for evaluating existence of TPG: cost/benefit of the team vs guild or nothing or other models.  JA
 * GG: I think that the for-profit model of a CoP example does not apply to us.  Would prefer to use it only as a starting point to generate our own. NH
 * GG: I want the Guild to be about learning and super-lightweight and self-organizing.  I fear that others might want to make it more like Tea Time. NH
 * GG:  Counter-proposal for Org Tune-Up was not fun for me.  I feel that there is this perception [in the counter-proposal] that project management is perceived as a bad thing.
 * GG: It was awkward that Org Tune-Up worked out for me but not all wolves
 * GG: It was hard for me to see my fellow packmates under so much stress
 * GG: I think that we were living in a bubble of CSAT praise.   While it’s valuable to know this, I that I would have preferred it to have been delivered as a blunt instrument rather than a trickle-in, progressively clarified information. GG JA KL KL
 * GG:  Was weird to fill out the engagement survey mid-Org Tune-Up
 * KL: Org Tune-Up processing seems helpful for some, but is not for others GG KL NH
 * JA: Process and Outcome of Org Tune-Up
 * JA: Ending of Team Practices Group
 * Engagements
 * GG: Sharing docs with Erica L was harder than it had to be
 * Theory
 * GG: I think that the tension between getting stuff done and team health [as portrayed in the counter-proposal] is a forced false choice in which getting stuff done is somehow seen as unpalatable KL GG

= Discussion = (Discussion: What can we learn/do better next time, what do we need to say to be heard/to get closure, what do we want to test for practical fixes/actions/followups?)
 * 1) [4] GG: I think that we were living in a bubble of CSAT praise.   While it’s valuable to know this, I would have preferred it to have been delivered as a blunt instrument rather than a trickle-in, progressively clarified information. GG JA KL KL
 * 2) Seek not just praise but we can we do better?
 * 3) JA: Are you saying that if we had solicited more complete/better feedback, we’d have been able to do something different months ago and have a different Org Tune-Up outcome?
 * 4) GG: maybe not different outcome, but [...]
 * 5) KL: ...more prepared
 * 6) KL: GG I see in your item that the praise made a self-reinforcing praise bubble that perhaps was an opaque bubble that prevented the flow of good information.
 * 7) NH: we didn’t ask the right questions, or we ignored the answers?
 * 8) GG: …
 * 9) KL: two-way street.  Better answers, better attention to what we received; also, we could have received better information - clearer and more direct feedback from people who needed things from us.
 * 10) JA: The process didn’t feel like a high-quality assessment of how well TPG was working; felt like an arbitrary office-politics snap judgment.  Didn’t learn anything about whether TPG was a good idea.
 * 11) KL: Doesn’t matter if TPG is working well but in a bubble.
 * 12) KL: Seems like there was a perfect storm that may have made it feel arbitrary: TPG unmet needs were raised, structural changes emerged as a theme, a need for empowering senior leaders was recognized - maybe three are conflated in our minds and thus feel very targeted at TPG
 * 13) JA: Is there a follow up action?
 * 14) GG: No.  Lesson learned.
 * 15) KL: I’m going to use it … to be a better listener, continue working within the org; solicit more useful information and be better about sensing when someone is trying to communicate a need (even if unskillfully) and strive for clarity.
 * 16) [3] KL: Org Tune-Up processing seems helpful for some, but is not for others GG KL  NH
 * 17) GG: unresolved issues about practical guild vs tea-time and support.  Worried Guild will turn into venting.
 * 18) KL: General topic for action would be, being supportive without resorting to negativity/blaming/assumptions
 * 19) [2] GG: I think that the tension between getting stuff done and team health [as portrayed in the counter-proposal] is a forced false choice in which getting stuff done is somehow seen as unpalatable KL GG
 * 20) [2] JA: I wish I had been consulted on Org Tune-Up.  By the time I was informed of a proposal to change my role, it seemed that the decision was complete and final. GG NH
 * 21) [2] KS: I wish I had been informed that the Technology role being offered to me was actually as a Program Manager, not as an Agile Coach. GG KL
 * 22) [2] End of TPG -> beginning of TPG JA JA

= Action Items = JA: Will give non-present wolves until next week to react to notes before beginning redaction.

Next month’s facilitator:
 * June 22.
 * AR and KL will be out.
 * KL: Cancel in favor of off-site?
 * NH: Kevin won’t be at off-site.
 * JA to ask in email that circulates notes.
 * Cancel the retro in favor of off-site.
 * Have the retro at 5/7 pack
 * Reschedule a bit earlier.
 * Other_______? profit!