[296] in I/T Delivery
Minutes 21 April Project Team Leaders Meeting.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Cattey)
Fri Apr 21 16:06:36 2000
Message-Id: <Yt0=Hqhz0001AAQF4u@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 20:07:18 +0000 ()
From: Bill Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
To: magellan@MIT.EDU, delivery@MIT.EDU, integration-ptl@MIT.EDU
Cc: itlt@MIT.EDU
Project Team Leaders Meeting
21 April 2000
AGENDA:
I. Discuss updated project leader responsibility and process map.
II. Follow up on support process guidelines
III. Operational plan Alive
IV. Roundtable
Next meeting is May 19, 2000.
---------
I. Discuss updated project leader responsibility and process map.
Two Desired Outcomes:
A. Answer the following 4 questions:
1. Do we understand new project leader responsibilities?
2. Do we agree on major new points:
Monthly reporting?
Design review?
3. Can we evolve a process for effective design reviews,
complementing the ITIT reviews?
4. Does the draft Delivery Process Map work for build or buy
scenarios?
B. Review the following 2 assertions:
1. Today's purpose is NOT to develop resources to help in the
BUY situation (still a potential project).
2. Today's purpose is also NOT to debate BUILD vs BUY decision
process. That is typically a Discovery Question.
----
Discussion:
In the team recruitment phase, there is the issue of negotiating
with potential staffers what the work is, what the committment of
time is, and what the fit is.
Also there is an issue of having a clear understanding of what
potential team member skills really are.
Q: Where would monthly reporting be posted?
A: To the 'delivery' list and to the team members.
The hope is that the monthly reporting would process-wise
also follow the Magellan model:
Project leader meetings would not be used to go over status reports.
Project leaders would be expected to read the reports offline.
The reports are expected to be brief -- under a page in size.
The project leader meetings are about discussing themes and issues
distilled from reports.
Design reviews are expected to follow a process DIFFERENT from an
ITIT review.
Perhaps the project management helpers can work on evolving resources
and guidelines for conducting design reviews. Bob Ferrara, Scott
Thorne, and others are going to get together and work on this.
In addition to design reviews, there may be call for code
reviews.
Q: Do we agree that instituting monthly reporting and design
review is appropriate?
A: Even though such efforts will be imperfect, it is important
that we institute this sort of learning process. Now that more
basic aspects of our work process is in place, these two things
seem appropriate next steps in refinement.
In the past, at MIT, design reviews have not gone well -- Perhaps
due to lack of committment on the part of reviewers.
Add to Director role is explicit mention of availability for
consultation and escallation.
--------
II. Follow up on support process guidelines
Feedback has come in.
Thanks muchly for the feedback.
Next step is to incorporate feedback into next draft.
Expect a next draft in about 2 weeks.
If you have additional comments, expectations, etc., email hogue@mit.edu
--------
III. Operational plan Alive update
In about a week, project team leaders are going to receive
email pointing at a database that is being worked on.
The overarching goal is to help keep a picture of the
work we're doing up to date.
3 kinds of information being managed:
Projects -- we're gonna use the Projects Database
Activities -- we don't know yet how were going to manage this.
Strategies and Initiatives -- going into the new database
The Strategies and Initiatives will be a read-only database with
a workflow to have Directors keep it updated as a consequence
of input from everyone.
The first load of that database will be information that
was last gone over back in October. So a first step is for
everyone to look at that data and report on how it DIFFERS
from the current reality.
The objective is to have an integrated database of all three kinds
of information by July.
--------
IV. Roundtable
Events Calendaring:
Entering testing next week.
Still planning to go live May 22.
Microsoft Trip:
About a dozen people are going to Microsoft so we and they get
to know each other better.
Focus is on Academic efforts such as I-Campus.
Pismere Status:
Paul Hill will also be working Windows 2000 / Pismere issues
at the Microsoft visit.
Hoping to add another full-timer and many students over the summer.
Have a fairly good idea where to go with deploying a Kerberos
Key Distribution Center.
Gartner:
We have had a subscription to the Gartner Group.
It used to be on CD, and now is on the Web.
We have a limited number of licenses for this data.
People interested in what's going on in the market,
should see Susan Minai-Azary for access.
We also have a contract with Gartner for other services.
GIS:
Discovery project is wrapping up technology investigation.
Starting to reach out -- starting off a survey, focus groups,
library investigations, etc..
Hope is to have some sort of prototype out by the summer.
