Strategy Phase One Retro

From MediaWiki.org
Jump to: navigation, search

Strategy Phase One Retro[edit]

In attendance: Brian G, Bryan D, Kaity, Kristen, Moushira, Josh, JK, Adam Baso, Anne G, Toby

Worked Well[edit]

  • breaking into groups
  • having a framework/model
  • Flexibility and openness were helpful
  • TPGEEEENIUS
  • in-person kickoff +1
  • Josh's orientation
  • Adam and Kristen just started it while I was on vacation
  • Kristen's faciliation -- hard to imagine this working without it +1+1+1
  • Everyone's openmindedness and effort -- thanks! "no strategy grinches"
  • Touch points with execs, "taking a step back" (reviewing with stakeholders) <<Could we do this with Community, too?
  • structure and process were absolutely critical
  • cross disciplines included
  • Nice to get some cross-team/cross-discipline time to work together - it was very effective
  • identifying all problems, even ones we couldn't solve ourselves++++
  • defining scope of team's reach through process
  • hard deadlines for cascades was crucial to getting things dun
  • Video
  • We actually have a strategy now - it worked
  • re-using a methodology that is mainly directed for a pure commercial use case, wasn't bad :-)
  • Community updates +
  • Kickoff meetings worked well on-site (would like to know how it was for the off-site folks)
  • Relative to other discussions and processes of this type, this felt pretty collaborative and well-communicated both within and outside of WMF walls - I hope we can continue to build on this and imrpove and learn+
  • Book grew on me+ (facilitator's guide was lacking in some areas eg time commitments and some discussion pre-reqs, see below)
  • team members were able to come in and out of process sometimes as needed (and different people led at different times)

Could Improve Next Time[edit]

  • Three days would have been better than two for the onsite
  • Problem definition could have been timeboxed
  • Documentation could have been better
    • converting in-person and physical artifacts to a coherent narrative was challenging
  • Jargon/MBA-ness+1 ++(it might help to roll the stages out more slowly, not overwhelming everyone with all the stuff at once)
  • Hard to track timeline/deliverables - central place for deadlines
  • Trying different strategies (approaches?) for engagement, for requesting feedback (in hindsight, plan for specific points of engagement)+
    • Ask for problems on-wiki up front (as opposed to cascade levels 1-3)
    • Try different channels of communications in addition to wikis
    • Do have 2-3 community members deeply involved in the process (very cool idea)
    • Make better decisions on "document everything" vs "smart messaging"
  • executive buy-in timing flexibiltiity, coulda used more
  • more discussion of values up-front (eg privacy vs serving users throguh data analysis)
  • trim options more up-front
  • More inclusion of teams/community in brain storming phase (what we did in the on-site meetings)+1
  • need more skeptics - more community invovlement? (you need measured feedback so would need longer commitment)
  • Industry analysis should have been done before-hand+
  • Industry analysis could have been a more explicit focus during onsite
  • went from super fast cascade drafts with tests to much slower+ more expliicit about who owns what stages
  • Switch from ideation to reducing possibilites seemed quick and may have missed some ideas from the "big wall of ideas" stage (transition phases were lossy)
  • Not being there for kickoff (anne)
  • Calendars accidental exclusion - google group! FTW
  • having to read a book, whatevs.
  • Probably this could still happen: We need to transfer the experience to the rest of the teams in WMF.
  • underestimated cost/size of tests (tried to accommodate them, but in the end, we didn't) - tests are a lot of work, exec pressure led to announcement before testing
  • Schedule slips - didn't stick to published calendar on wiki, hindered ability to get tests kicked off
  • seemed very time consuming (but worthwhile?) - challenges of doing this while also continuing business as usual, could we have paused and just focused on strategy?
  • faciliatator guide weak in important places and unrealistic on timing ++